Missed bipolarity and psychiatric comorbidity in women with postpartum depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic profile of women referred for postpartum depression. METHODS: Fifty-six women seen consecutively with the referral diagnosis of postpartum depression were administered structured instruments to gather information about their DSM-IV Axis I diagnoses. RESULTS: In terms of frequency of occurrence, the primary diagnoses in this sample were: major depressive disorder (46%), bipolar disorder not otherwise specified (29%), bipolar II disorder (23%), and bipolar I disorder (2%). A current comorbid disorder, with no lifetime comorbidity, occurred among 32% of the sample; by contrast, lifetime comorbidity alone (i.e., with no currently comorbid disorder) was found among 27%. Both a lifetime and a current comorbidity were found among 18% of the women, and 23% had no comorbid disorder. The most frequently occurring current comorbid disorder was an anxiety disorder (46%), with obsessive-compulsive disorder (62%) being the most common type of anxiety disorder. For lifetime comorbidity, substance use (20%) and anxiety disorders (12%) were the two most common. Over 80% of patients who scored positive on either the Highs Scale or the Mood Disorder Questionnaire met the diagnostic criteria for a bipolar disorder. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that postpartum depression is a heterogeneous entity and that misdiagnosis of bipolar disorder in the postpartum period may be quite common. The findings have important clinical implications, which include the need for early detection of bipolarity through the use of reliable and valid assessment instruments, and implementation of appropriate prevention and treatment strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".