Dimensions of manic symptoms in youth: psychosocial impairment and cognitive performance in the <scp>IMAGEN</scp> sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been reported that mania may be associated with superior cognitive performance. In this study, we test the hypothesis that manic symptoms in youth separate along two correlated dimensions and that a symptom constellation of high energy and cheerfulness is associated with superior cognitive performance. METHOD: We studied 1755 participants of the IMAGEN study, of average age 14.4 years (SD = 0.43), 50.7% girls. Manic symptoms were assessed using the Development and Wellbeing Assessment by interviewing parents and young people. Cognition was assessed using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale For Children (WISC-IV) and a response inhibition task. RESULTS: Manic symptoms in youth formed two correlated dimensions: one termed exuberance, characterized by high energy and cheerfulness and one of undercontrol with distractibility, irritability and risk-taking behavior. Only the undercontrol, but not the exuberant dimension, was independently associated with measures of psychosocial impairment. In multivariate regression models, the exuberant, but not the undercontrolled, dimension was positively and significantly associated with verbal IQ by both parent- and self-report; conversely, the undercontrolled, but not the exuberant, dimension was associated with poor performance in a response inhibition task. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that manic symptoms in youth may form dimensions with distinct correlates. The results are in keeping with previous findings about superior performance associated with mania. Further research is required to study etiological differences between these symptom dimensions and their implications for clinical 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".