Mood lability among offspring of parents with bipolar disorder and community controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Early identification of bipolar disorder (BP) symptomatology is crucial for improving the prognosis of this illness. Increased mood lability has been reported in BP. However, mood lability is ubiquitous across psychiatric disorders and may be a marker of severe psychopathology and not specific to BP. To clarify this issue, this study examined the prevalence of mood lability and its components in offspring of BP parents and offspring of community control parents recruited through the Pittsburgh Bipolar Offspring Study. METHODS: Forty-one school-age BP offspring of 38 BP parents, 257 healthy or non-BP offspring of 174 BP parents, and 192 offspring of 117 control parents completed a scale that was developed to evaluate mood lability in youth, i.e., the Children's Affective Lability Scale (CALS). RESULTS: A factor analysis of the parental CALS, and in part the child CALS, revealed Irritability, Mania, and Anxiety/Depression factors, with most of the variance explained by the Irritability factor. After adjusting for confounding factors (e.g., parental and offspring non-BP psychopathology), BP offspring of BP parents showed the highest parental and child total and factor scores, followed by the non-BP offspring of BP parents, and then the offspring of the controls. CONCLUSIONS: Mood lability overall and mania-like, anxious/depressed, and particularly irritability symptoms may be a prodromal phenotype of BP among offspring of parents with BP. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify whether these symptoms will predict the development of BP and/or other psychopathology. If confirmed, these symptoms may become a target of treatment and biological studies before BP develops.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".