Substance Use Disorders and Overweight/Obesity in Bipolar I Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This investigation was undertaken to explore the relationship between alcohol/illicit drug dependence and overweight/obesity in individuals with bipolar I disorder. METHOD: The data for this analysis were procured from the Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health and Well-Being (CCHS) conducted by Statistics Canada in 2002. Bipolar I disorder was defined as persons screening positive for a lifetime manic episode using the World Mental Health 2000 version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI). Substance abuse and illicit drug dependence were determined using criteria commensurate with the DSM-IV-TR. Overweight and obesity were defined as a body mass index of 25.0 to 29.9 and greater than or equal to 30.0 kg/m(2), respectively. RESULTS: The total sample comprised 36,984 individuals (>or= 15 years old) screening positive for a lifetime manic episode. Subgroup analysis indicated that overweight/obese bipolar individuals had a significantly lower rate of substance dependence than the normal weight sample (13% vs. 21%, p < .01). Conversely, bipolar individuals who screened positive for substance dependence had a lower rate of overweight/obesity when compared with non-substance-dependent bipolar respondents (39% vs. 54%, p< .01). The inverse association between the presence of these 2 co-morbid conditions in bipolar I disorder continued to be statistically significant in multivariate analysis (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.34 to 0.95, p < .05). CONCLUSION: An inverse relationship between the presence of comorbid overweight/obesity and substance use disorders was observed in bipolar I disorder. These results suggest that comorbid addictive disorders (i.e., substance use and compulsive overeating) may compete for the same brain reward systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".