Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considerable debate exists regarding the continuity of bipolar disorder (BD) in children and adolescents. Do affected children continue to have BD as adults? Are pediatric forms of BD distinct from adult forms of the disorder? Here, I argue that, in fact, strictly defined BD I and II in children and adolescents is continuous with adult BD. First, if we take developmental differences into account, children and adults share similar symptoms, since they are both diagnosed according to DSM-IV criteria. Next, retrospective studies indicate that 50% to 66% of adults with BD had onset of their disorder before age 19 years. Early prospective data indicate that adolescents with BD progress to become young adults with BD. Further, family studies of pediatric BD probands find high rates of BD in adult relatives, and pediatric offspring of parents with BD have elevated rates of BD, compared with control subjects. Finally, biological characteristics of pediatric BD (such as treatment response, neurobiology, and genetics) are either shared with adults having BD or fit logically into developmental models of BD. Thus, while not conclusive, a preponderance of data support the hypothesis that pediatric BD is continuous with adult BD. Prospective studies incorporating phenomenological and biological assessment are needed to decisively address this issue.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".