The role of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression and anxiety disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bipolar disorder is a complex condition that includes symptoms of mania, depression, and often anxiety. Diagnosing and treating bipolar depression is challenging, with the disorder often being diagnosed as unipolar depression. In addition, comorbid anxiety can be a significant detractor to successful outcomes, increasing symptom severity, frequency of episodes and suicide rates, and decreasing response to antidepressant therapy. Anxiety often precedes and hastens the onset of bipolar disorder, and a shared genetic etiology has been suggested. Studies have demonstrated the efficacy of atypical antipsychotics for the acute and maintenance treatment of mania. Evidence from studies in patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder and bipolar depression indicate that these agents may also have antidepressant effects. In open trials in patients with bipolar mania, risperidone therapy has led to significant reductions in depression scores compared with baseline. Reductions in depression scores in patients with bipolar mania have been significantly greater with olanzapine compared with placebo. In patients with bipolar depression, the combination of olanzapine and fluoxetine resulted in significant improvement in depression compared with olanzapine alone or placebo. Although little data are available on the effects of these agents on comorbid anxiety in patients with bipolar disorder, some atypical antipsychotics have demonstrated efficacy in patients with anxiety disorders, including obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. Thus, atypical antipsychotics represent an important therapeutic option for the treatment of bipolar disorder, providing improvements in manic, depressive, and anxiety symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".