Sex differences in rates of obesity in bipolar disorder: postulated mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The increased standardized mortality ratio (SMR) from cardiovascular disease (CVD) in women with bipolar disorder (BD), relative to men with BD and individuals of both sexes in the general population, provides the impetus to identify factors that contribute to the differential association of obesity with BD in women. METHODS: We conducted a selective PubMed search of English-language articles published from September 1990 to June 2012. The key search terms were bipolar disorder and metabolic syndrome cross-referenced with gender, sex, obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. The search was supplemented with a manual review of relevant article reference lists. Articles selected for review were based on author consensus, the use of a standardized experimental procedure, validated assessment measures, and overall manuscript quality. RESULTS: It is amply documented that adults with BD are affected by the metabolic syndrome at a rate higher than the general population. Women with BD, when compared to men with BD and individuals of both sexes in the general population, have higher rates of abdominal obesity. The course and clinical presentation of BD manifest differently in men and women, wherein women exhibit a higher frequency of depression predominant illness, a later onset of BD, more seasonal variations in mood disturbance, and increased susceptibility to relapse. Phenomenological factors can be expanded to include differences in patterns of comorbidity between the sexes among patients with BD. Other factors that contribute to the increased risk for abdominal obesity in female individuals with BD include reproductive life events, anamnestic (e.g., sexual and/or physical abuse), lifestyle, and iatrogenic. CONCLUSIONS: A confluence of factors broadly categorized as broad- and sex-based subserve the increased rate of obesity in women with BD. It remains a testable hypothesis that the increased abdominal obesity in women with BD mediates the increased SMR from CVD. A clinical recommendation that emerges from this review is amplified attention to the appearance, or history, of factors that conspire to increase obesity in female patients with BD.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".