Three times more days depressed than manic or hypomanic in both bipolar I and bipolar II disorder<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the proportion of time spent in mania, depression and euthymia in a large cohort of bipolar subjects studied longitudinally, and to investigate depression/mania ratios in patients with bipolar I versus bipolar II disorder. METHODS: Clinician-adjusted self-ratings of mood were completed daily for one year for naturalistically treated outpatients with bipolar I (n = 405) or bipolar II (n = 102) disorder. Ratings were analyzed for mean time spent euthymic, depressed, manic, hypomanic, and cycling, and the percentages of time spent ill were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Percentages of time spent ill for bipolar I versus II patients were: euthymia 47.7% versus 50.2%; depression 36.0% versus 37.0%; hypomania 11.5% versus 9.8%; mania 1.0% versus 0.2%; and cycling 3.7% versus 2.8%. The depression/mania ratio was 2.9 in the bipolar I and 3.8 in bipolar II sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS: Depression represents the predominant abnormal mood state for treated outpatients with bipolar I and II disorder. In contrast to other studies, we found that depression/mania ratios were of a similar magnitude, suggesting the same tendency towards mood instability in both sub-groups.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".