MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W106285909 · doi:10.1017/s1092852900028844

Bipolar Disorder: A National Health Concern

2004· review· en· W106285909 on OpenAlexaff
Roger S. McIntyre, Jakub Z. Konarski

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Spectrums · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipolar disorderComorbidityPsychosocialPsychiatryPsychopathologyPsychological interventionMedicineTreatment of bipolar disorderPharmacotherapyPsychologyManiaMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bipolar disorders are prevalent, disabling, and costly diseases that often pursue an inexorable course. Underdetection, misdiagnosis, and diagnostic delay frequently and unnecessarily interfere with appropriate treatment of the disorder. Mortality studies in bipolar disorder underscore the relevance of both unnatural and natural causes of death, inviting the need for improved preventative and primary health care for bipolar patients. The treatment framework for bipolar disorder must recognize and anticipate the multidimensionality and comorbidity of this illness. Pharmacotherapy is necessary, with multiple concomitant medications required for most patients. In addition, adjunctive psychosocial interventions offer enhanced compliance and may beneficially influence psychopathological and functional outcomes. This article emphasizes the public health concern of bipolar disorder, and provides tactics to enhance detection of cryptic bipolar states, underscore the clinical and pathophysiological relevance of comorbidity in bipolar disorder, and provide a framework for multimodality therapy for this condition.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNS SpectrumsSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207