MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recovery and functional outcomes following olanzapine treatment for bipolar I mania

2005· article· en· W1963578227 on OpenAlexaff
KN Roy Chengappa, John Hennen, Ross J. Baldessarini, David J. Kupfer, Lakshmi N. Yatham, Samuel Gershon, Robert W. Baker, Mauricio Tohen

Bibliographic record

VenueBipolar Disorders · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBruce J. Anderson FoundationEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsManiaOlanzapineYoung Mania Rating ScaleClinical Global ImpressionBipolar disorderPlaceboDepression (economics)MedicinePsychologyRating scalePsychosocialClinical trialInternal medicineMoodPsychiatrySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Typical experimental categorizations of treatment responses in bipolar disorder (BPD) patients may have limited relationship to clinical recovery or functional status, and there is inadequate research on such clinically important outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed data from a study of open continuation of olanzapine treatment following a 3-week placebo-controlled trial involving initially hospitalized adult subjects with DSM-IV BP-I mania to estimate rates and times to symptomatic remission (low scores on standardized symptomatic assessments) and clinical recovery (remission sustained>or=8 weeks), associated clinical factors, and functional outcomes. RESULTS: During treatment with olanzapine for 27.9+/-20.1 weeks, symptomatic remission was attained by 70% of subjects, half by 8 weeks (95% CI 6-10) weeks, and later lost by 82% of remitted subjects; remitted (versus non-remitted) subjects had slightly lower baseline clinical global impression scores and greater trial-completion. Sustained clinical recovery was attained by only 40 of 113 (35%) of subjects, half by 36 (95% CI 20-40) weeks, and later lost by 45%. Subjects with above-median (>12) initial Hamilton-Depression rating scale depression scores were half as likely to recover (p=0.016) and did so much later (36 versus 12 weeks) than those with lower scores. At final assessment, self-rated well being (SF-36 psychosocial functioning scores) improved substantially more among recovered versus non-recovered subjects (mean changes: 87% versus 23%), and two-thirds of recovered subjects remained unemployed-for-pay while half received disability-compensation. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically meaningful symptomatic remission and recovery in relatively severely ill adult bipolar I manic patients were achieved slowly and sustained by only some patients within an average of 7 months of continuous treatment. These clinically relevant outcomes were worse with relatively high initial dysphoria ratings. Well-being was rated higher by recovered subjects, but their ability to work and live independently were markedly impaired. These findings underscore the emerging view that BPD can often be severe, slow to remit, and disabling, particularly in association with prominent depression-dysphoria symptoms. Improved treatments for BPD are needed, guided by longitudinal assessments of clinically meaningful measures of symptomatic recovery and functional outcome.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBipolar DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207