MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060275148 · doi:10.1080/10401230701653591

Differentiating Bipolar Disorders from Major Depressive Disorders: Treatment Implications

2007· review· en· W2060275148 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Muzina, David E. Kemp, Roger S. McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Clinical Psychiatry · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipolar disorderMajor depressive disorderPsychiatryPrevalence of mental disordersMoodMood disordersBipolar II disorderPsychologyDepression (economics)ManiaClinical psychologyMedicineMental healthAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder is a highly prevalent mood disorder, frequently misdiagnosed as unipolar major depressive disorder. METHODS: In order to summarize the historical and clinical features that may distinguish bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, a MedLine search was conducted of all English-language articles published between 1996 and 2006 using the key search terms bipolar disorder and manic-depression cross-referenced with major depressive disorder. RESULTS: Better methods for arriving at the correct diagnosis of bipolar disorder include a clinical history that evaluates symptoms beyond narrow DSM-IV criteria and the use of self-reported screening tools. Twenty-six separate features were identified that are believed to aid in the differentiation of bipolar disorder from unipolar major depressive disorder. CONCLUSIONS: It is estimated that as many as 1 in 5 depressed outpatients may have undeclared bipolar disorder. Recognition of bipolar disorder can be improved by increasing the clinical acumen of diagnosticians and through the use of screening tools.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207