MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135667614 · doi:10.1176/appi.ps.52.3.358

Bipolar II Disorder: Symptoms, Course, and Response to Treatment

2001· review· en· W2135667614 on OpenAlexafffund
Glenda MacQueen, L. Trevor Young

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Services · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsHypomaniaBipolar disorderManiaBipolar II disorderPsychiatryPrevalence of mental disordersPsychologyAnxietyDepression (economics)Treatment of bipolar disorderAntidepressantClinical psychologyMedicineLithium (medication)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors provide an overview of the diagnosis, course, and treatment of bipolar II disorder, a distinct subtype that is often misdiagnosed as unipolar depression or bipolar I disorder. They discuss research suggesting that underdiagnosis of bipolar II disorder reflects a failure to identify subthreshold expression of mania (hypomania). The course of bipolar II disorder is different from that of bipolar I disorder or unipolar depression, with distinct differences in rates of recovery, clinical features, and number of episodes. The risk of suicide appears to be particularly elevated. High rates of comorbid disorders have been reported, including substance abuse or dependence, anxiety disorders, and personality disorders. Few definitive studies exist on which to base conclusions about the differential efficacy of various treatment strategies in bipolar II disorder and bipolar I disorder. Preliminary studies suggest that the newer anticonvulsants may be of benefit for patients with bipolar II disorder, while other data suggest that there may be a greater role for antidepressant medications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations88
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric ServicesSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207