One-Year Outcome After Preconception Consultation in Women With Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One-Year Outcome After Preconception Consultation in Women With Bipolar DisorderTo the Editor: The pharmacologic management of bipolar disorder in women who wish to conceive poses a difficult dilemma for the patient, her partner, and the clinician.1 If psychotropic medication is discontinued, the patient is as likely to develop a recurrence during pregnancy as a nonpregnant woman, 2,3 and immediately after childbirth she is more likely to become ill than remain well.3 However, continuation of several drugs used in bipolar disorder carries the risk of congenital or developmental anomalies in the offspring.This concerns foremost valproate, 4 but also carbamazepine, 5 lithium, 6 and possibly lamotrigine.7 Psychiatrists specializing in perinatal disorders increasingly receive referrals for preconception consultation.Typically, the psychiatric and medication histories are carefully reviewed, and a medication plan is discussed with the patient and her partner and integrated into an overall relapse prevention plan.However, it is unknown what effect this intervention has on maternal mental health.In this uncontrolled retrospective evaluation, we examined maternal outcome in terms of treatment decisions made and symptoms experienced in the 12 months after preconception consultation in a specialist perinatal psychiatry service.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".