Bipolar depression versus unipolar depression: demographic and clinical differences
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Unipolar depression (UD) and bipolar depression (BD) are both characterized by depressive symptoms. In clinical practice, it is hard to distinguish between BD and UD. This often results in misdiagnosis of BD. Misdiagnosis and consequently incorrect treatment represents a burden on patient, society and family. There is still a need for more detailed differentiation between unipolar and bipolar depression to avoid misdiagnosis. Based on this background, the aim of this study was to draw a map for clear, precise, detailed, and simple differentiation points between bipolar and unipolar depression. Methods This study is a cross-sectional study. It concluded a consecutive sample of 178 patients diagnosed with depression. Depression was diagnosed using DSM-5 criteria and confirmed with the use of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Disorders, Clinician Version (SCID-5-CV). Having a history of manic episodes confirms the diagnosis of bipolar depression. All patients were subjected to socio-demographic and clinical data collection form, application of Hamilton depression rating scale, Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (mixed subscale), Beck Hopelessness Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA), and the Sheehan Disability Scale, as differentiation tools. Results There was a statistically considerable increased frequency of divorced patients, previous depression episodes, previous manic episodes, family history of mood disorders, and hospitalization rate among the bipolar depression group. Regarding the unipolar depression group, there was a considerable rise in the number of female patients and precipitating factors of unipolar depression. There was a considerable rise in anxiety psychic and agitation mean scores of Hamilton depression scale among the bipolar depression group, while there was a statistically considerable increase in anxiety somatic mean score among the unipolar depression group. There was a statistically considerable increase in the severity of all parameters and total score of mixed subscale of Bipolar Depression Rating Scale among the bipolar depression group. No statistically significant difference was found between the studied groups in total Beck hopelessness mean score and the total MOCA mean score. There was a considerable rise in social life mean score and days lost mean score in Sheehan Disability Scale among the bipolar depression group. Conclusions The differentiating points between bipolar and unipolar depression include a considerable increase in divorce, family history of mood disorders, previous depressive episodes, previous hospitalization, anxiety psychic agitation, restlessness, irritability, disability in social life, and days lost per week among the bipolar depressive group. On the other hand, there was a considerable increase of unipolar depression among the female gender. Precipitating factors of unipolar depression and anxiety somatic symptoms are significantly higher among the unipolar depression group. Taking these points into account is extremely beneficial in accurately distinguishing between unipolar and bipolar depression and thus providing accurate treatment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».