Pharmacotherapy of bipolar II disorder during and after pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacotherapy of bipolar II disorder during pregnancy and the postpartum period. METHODS: The use of psychotropic drugs and recurrence risk during and after pregnancy was studied in a prospective, observational study of 37 women with bipolar II disorder. RESULTS: During pregnancy the majority of participants (54.0%) were not on any psychotropic medication, approximately one third (32%) received monotherapy, and the rest were on combination therapy. In comparison, during the postpartum period only 14% of participants were not on any psychotropic medication, approximately 35% received monotherapy, and over 50% were on combination therapy. While only 13.5% of participants were on 3 or more psychotropic drugs during pregnancy, 21.6% required 3 or more psychotropic drugs after childbirth in order to manage their symptoms. During pregnancy, 51 % of women had a mood episode compared to a recurrence rate of 70% in the postpartum period. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, lack of a control group, and absence of random treatment assignment. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this prospective, observational study indicate that the recurrence risk is much higher after childbirth than during pregnancy in spite of higher utilization of psychotropic drugs in the postpartum period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".