MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036399937 · doi:10.1586/14737175.7.8.919

Maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder: a focus on aripiprazole

2007· review· en· W2036399937 on OpenAlexaff
Roger S. McIntyre, Hanna O. Woldeyohannes, Batya S Yasgur, Joanna K. Soczynska, Andrew Miranda, Jakub Z. Konarski

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Neurotherapeutics · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAripiprazolePsychosocialBipolar disorderPsychiatryMedicineAntipsychoticQuality of life (healthcare)Psychological interventionAtypical antipsychoticPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Cognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bipolar disorders (BD) are chronic medical syndromes heterogeneous in phenomenology, pathophysiology and treatment. The longitudinal course of bipolar disorders is often characterized by nonrecovery, subsyndromal symptoms, enduring cognitive deficits and impairment in psychosocial function. The risk for premature mortality from unnatural (e.g., suicide) as well as natural causes (e.g., cardiovascular disease) is significantly higher than the general population. The therapeutic objectives of maintenance therapy are to prevent relapse/recurrence, reduce the risk for premature mortality, promote functional restoration and enhance quality of life. A chronic disease management model, which includes pharmacologic and manual-based psychosocial interventions as paradigmatic components, provides a framework for best practice and optimal patient outcome. This article provides a succinct review of treatments approved by the US FDA for maintenance in bipolar disorders, with a focus on the most recently approved atypical antipsychotic, aripiprazole.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of NeurotherapeuticsSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207