Taiwan consensus of pharmacological treatment for bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bipolar disorder is an important psychiatric disorder with different disease phases. The pharmacological treatment is complicated, and is updated frequently as new research evidence emerges. For the purpose of international collaboration, research, and education, the Taiwan consensus of pharmacological treatment for bipolar disorders was initiated by the Taiwanese Society of Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology (TSBPN) - the Bipolar Chapter, which was established in August 2010 and approved as a member of International Society of Bipolar Disorder. TSBPN is the country member of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP). The development of the Taiwan consensus for bipolar disorder was mainly based on the template of WFSBP Guidelines, with references to other international guidelines including the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments, and British Association for Psychopharmacology. We have also added Taiwanese experts' experience, Taiwan national health insurance data, and the indications for the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder given by the Taiwan Department of Health, to emphasize the balance between efficacy and safety, and to make this consensus a concise, empirical, and important reference for clinical psychiatric practice.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".