Is Response to Prophylactic Lithium a Familial Trait?
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.355
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.501
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Selecting a drug according to the treatment response in a relative has been widely accepted advice in the management of mood disorders. However, this recommendation has not been adequately substantiated in the literature. We tested the hypothesis that response to long-term lithium treatment is a familial trait. METHOD: We compared response to long-term lithium treatment in bipolar relatives of bipolar lithium responders and bipolar controls. Twenty-four relatives with bipolar disorder (as determined using the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Lifetime version [SADS-L] and Research Diagnostic Criteria [RDC]) were identified in families of 106 patients with lithium-responsive bipolar disorder. A consecutive series of 40 lithium-treated patients in a bipolar clinic (meeting RDC and DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder) served as a comparison group. Lithium response was evaluated on a rating scale reflecting the quality and quantity of available data. RESULTS: The prevalence of unequivocal response among the relatives was 67%, as compared with the response rate of 35% in the comparison group (chi2 = 6.04, df = 1, p = .014). CONCLUSION: This highly significant difference in response between relatives and the control group supports the view that the response to lithium prophylaxis clusters in families.
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.
The record
- Venue
- The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
- Topic
- Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
- Field
- Medicine
- Canadian institutions
- Dalhousie UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Bipolar disorderLithium (medication)MoodMood disordersPsychiatryPsychologyRating scaleDrug responseMood stabilizerSchedule for Affective Disorders and SchizophreniaSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)TraitClinical psychologyMedicineInternal medicineAnxietyDrugDevelopmental psychology
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes