MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155877462 · doi:10.4088/jcp.v67n0609

A Gender-Focused Perspective on Health Service Utilization in Comorbid Bipolar I Disorder and Alcohol Use Disorders

2006· article· en· W2155877462 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin I. Goldstein, Anthony Levitt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlcohol use disorderPerspective (graphical)Bipolar disorderComorbidityPsychiatryPsychologyMedicineAlcoholClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study compares health service utilization by individuals with comorbid lifetime bipolar I disorder and lifetime alcohol use disorders (AUD) to that of individuals with either diagnosis alone, using nationally representative data. METHOD: The 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions was used to identify respondents with bipolar I disorder only (BD-only; N = 636), AUD only (N = 11,068), and comorbid bipolar I disorder and AUD (BD-AUD; N = 775). Diagnoses were generated using the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-DSM-IV Version. The 3 groups were compared with respect to self-reported health service utilization. RESULTS: For both men and women, respondents in the BD-AUD group were significantly more likely than AUD-only respondents to report any alcohol-related service utilization (p < .001). BD-AUD respondents were significantly more likely to report bipolar disorder-related hospital admissions as compared with BD-only respondents among males only (p = .009). Within the BD-AUD group, males reported significantly greater utilization of AUD treatment only (p < .001), and females reported significantly greater utilization of bipolar disorder treatment only (p < .001) and significantly greater likelihood of utilizing mental health services overall (p < .001). There was no gender difference in the proportion of respondents who utilized both AUD and bipolar disorder services. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, individuals with comorbid bipolar I disorder and AUD utilize significantly more mental health services than individuals with either disorder alone. The primary original finding is that among those with comorbid bipolar I disorder and AUD, bipolar I disorder is more likely to go untreated among males and AUD is more likely to go untreated among females. Gender may be an important factor to consider in future health service planning for comorbid bipolar I disorder and AUD.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207