Circadian secretion of cortisol in bipolar disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the 24-h cortisol secretion profiles of normal control subjects and patients with bipolar disorder who were in the depressive, manic and euthymic phases of the disorder. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen patients, 25-62 years of age, in depressed (n = 5), manic (n = 5) or euthymic (n = 8) phase of bipolar disorder recruited through a psychiatric outpatient clinic, and 5 control subjects, 24-41 years of age, recruited through advertisement or word of mouth. OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects were interviewed and symptom ratings were obtained using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory and Young Mania Scale. Blood collection began at 0800 and continued at hourly intervals for 24 h. Serum cortisol levels were assayed using a validated commercial radioimmunoassay kit. RESULTS: An analysis of variance of the area under the cortisol 24-h time-concentration curve (AUC) revealed a significant difference between the control group and patient groups (F = 3.69, p = 0.03). the mean AUCs of the patients in the depressed (263.4 micrograms/dL) and hypomanic (262.2 micrograms/dL) phases were beyond the 95% confidence interval for the controls (120.9-253.3 micrograms/dL). There were no significant group differences in cosinor acrophase and no significant effects of sex, education, age of illness onset, duration of illness or duration of mood state at time of testing on the cortisol measures. Pearson correlations between symptom rating scores and cortisol secretion variables were not significant. CONCLUSION: The increases in cortisol secretion in patients in both the depressed and manic phases of bipolar disorder suggest that cortisol level is probably not a state marker in bipolar disorder.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".