Bouncing back: is the bipolar rebound phenomenon peculiar to lithium? A retrospective naturalistic study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In bipolar disorder the discontinuation of lithium prophylaxis is associated with early episode precipitation. Is this ;rebound' phenomenon peculiar to lithium? This naturalistic retrospective case note review investigated the frequency of immediate recurrence after discontinuation of any prophylactic treatment. Bipolar patients who stopped at least one medication after at least 6 months of remission were studied. A total of 310 case notes were examined in a systematic search. A total of 53 cases of discontinuation in 48 subjects were found. Discontinued medications included lithium, valproate, carbamazepine, typical and atypical antipsychotics and antidepressants. Recurrence occurred within 3 months of medication withdrawal in 39 cases (74%). Over half of the discontinuation episodes involved lithium: recurrence occurred in 86% of these cases. In the groups stopping other prophylactic agents, a majority of subjects suffered recurrence: anticonvulsants (89%), antipsychotics (64%) and antidepressants (58%). However, these groups were small and the clarity of the data was undermined by the simultaneous withdrawal of other agents. Manic and hypomanic episodes were the most common form of recurrences. Depressive episodes occurred proportionately most frequently following antidepressant withdrawal. More than half of recurrences required hospital admission. This study provides preliminary naturalistic evidence that early episode recurrence in bipolar disorder is not peculiar to lithium withdrawal but may occur following withdrawal of medication from all classes recommended in prophylaxis. These findings, if replicated, have important implications for clinical practice and for research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".