Dimensional psychopathology in preschool offspring of parents with bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to compare the dimensional psychopathology, as ascertained by parental report, in preschool offspring of parents with bipolar disorder (BP) and offspring of community control parents. METHODS: 122 preschool offspring (mean age 3.3 years) of 84 parents with BP, with 102 offspring of 65 control parents (36 healthy, 29 with non-BP psychopathology), were evaluated using the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), the CBCL-Dysregulation Profile (CBCL-DP), the Early Childhood Inventory (ECI-4), and the Emotionality Activity Sociability (EAS) survey. Teachers' Report Forms (TRF) were available for 51 preschoolers. RESULTS: After adjusting for confounders, offspring of parents with BP showed higher scores in the CBCL total, externalizing, somatic, sleep, aggressive, and CBCL-DP subscales; the ECI-4 sleep problem scale; and the EAS total and emotionality scale. The proportion of offspring with CBCL T-scores ≥ 2 SD above the norm was significantly higher on most CBCL subscales and the CBCL-DP in offspring of parents with BP compared to offspring of controls even after excluding offspring with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and/or oppositional defiant disorder. Compared to offspring of parents with BP-I, offspring of parents with BP-II showed significantly higher scores in total and most CBCL subscales, the ECI-4 anxiety and sleep scales and the EAS emotionality scale. For both groups of parents, there were significant correlations between CBCL and TRF scores (r = .32-.38, p-values ≤.02). CONCLUSIONS: Independent of categorical axis-I psychopathology and other demographic or clinical factors in both biological parents, preschool offspring of parents with BP have significantly greater aggression, mood dysregulation, sleep disturbances, and somatic complaints compared to offspring of control parents. Interventions to target these symptoms are warranted.
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) | 0.000 | 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".