Aripiprazole Adjunct Treatment in Bipolar I or II Disorder, Depressed State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The symptomatic course of bipolar disorder (BPD) is chronic and dominated by depression. As recurrence rates are high, maintenance therapy is required. Although efficacious, mood stabilizers may be hampered by poor adherence, and second-generation antipsychotic medications may be associated with weight gain and metabolic abnormalities. There is evidence to suggest that aripiprazole is beneficial in major depressive disorder and BPD with depression. We therefore investigated 2-year clinical outcomes with aripiprazole adjunct therapy at 5 to 15 mg once daily alongside a mood stabilizer in 40 patients with BPD. All patients experienced marked improvements in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale scores by 6 weeks and substantial reductions in Clinical Global Impressions Scale scores by 6 months. All patients were able to return to optimal or premorbid functioning by 6 months to 1 year. By 1 year, all patients made a complete functional recovery on the Sheehan Disability Scale. Improvements were maintained on all measures up to 2 years. There were minimal adverse events, all of which decreased during therapy. Our findings indicate that aripiprazole adjunct treatment is safe and effective as an acute and maintenance therapy for BPD. However, the findings will need to be replicated by larger studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".