Effects of the menstrual cycle on bipolar disorder
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Several lines of research suggest that reproductive events may affect the course of bipolar disorder (BD) in some women. With respect to the menstrual cycle, the focus has been on dysphoric symptoms [e.g., premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD)], and the exacerbation of depression, in the premenstrual phase. This article reviews the literature on the potential effects of the menstrual cycle on BD. METHODS: A systematic search for published case reports and research studies available through March, 2013 was conducted. Several combinations of search terms were entered into PubMed and PsycInfo. RESULTS: Overall, 25 case reports, ten retrospective studies, and 11 prospective studies were identified. The majority (64%) of case reports involved hypomanic or manic episodes in the premenstrual phase. Retrospective results suggest that 25-77% and 15-27% of women with BD meet the criteria for premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and PMDD, respectively. Menstrual cycle-related mood changes were reported by 64-68% of women with BD in retrospective studies, and were displayed by 44-65% of women in prospective studies. CONCLUSIONS: Although research has focused on the premenstrual phase to the neglect of the periovulatory phase, it appears that a subgroup of women with BD, possibly those with hormonal sensitivity, experience menstrual cycle effects on depressive, hypomanic, and manic episodes. These phase-episode effects appear to be heterogeneous and may have implications for treatment. Whether they might best be described using course specifiers, similar to postpartum onset and rapid cycling, or as diagnostic entities, like PMDD, requires further study.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it