Community Survey of Bipolar Disorder in Canada: Lifetime Prevalence and Illness Characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study reports on the lifetime prevalence and illness characteristics of bipolar disorder (BD) in a large, representative sample of Canadians. METHOD: Data were obtained from the Canadian Community Health Survey: Mental Health and Well-Being. This representative, cross-sectional survey, conducted by Statistics Canada in 2002, examines the mental health of Canadians aged 15 years and over. The national response rate was 77%. We determined the prevalence rate of BD, correlates of a bipolar diagnosis, and illness characteristics. RESULTS: The weighted lifetime prevalence rate of BD was 2.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.94% to 2.37%). Younger age, low income adequacy, lifetime anxiety disorder, and presence of a substance use disorder in the past 12 months were each significantly associated with the presence of a BD diagnosis (P < 0.001 for each). The largest effect found was for the presence of an anxiety disorder (odds ratio 7.94; 95% CI, 6.35 to 9.92). A lifetime history of anxiety disorder was reported by 51.8% (955% CI, 47.1% to 56.5%) of the respondents with BD, with both panic disorder and agoraphobia each being more frequent among women, compared with men (P = 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively). The mean age at onset of illness was 22.5 years, SD 12.0. CONCLUSIONS: According to the estimated lifetime prevalence of BD found in this study, over 500 000 Canadians likely suffer from this condition. Identifying those at highest risk for BD may assist in developing more effective community-based identification and intervention strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".