Comorbid Anxiety Disorders in Canadians with Bipolar Disorder: Clinical Characteristics and Service Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of anxiety disorders comorbid to bipolar disorder (BD) in a large, nationally representative sample, to describe the sociodemographic and clinical profiles of Canadians living with BD and with or without comorbid anxiety disorders, to identify the characteristics uniquely associated with comorbid anxiety, and to examine treatment patterns. METHOD: We analyzed data from the Canadian Community Health Survey: Mental Health and Well-Being, conducted among 38 492 Canadians. People meeting the criteria for BD (n = 808) were compared based on the presence or absence of an assessed anxiety disorder (that is, social phobia, panic disorder, and agoraphobia). RESULTS: People with BD and a comorbid anxiety disorder fare worse in terms of BD relapses, suicidality, and sleep disturbance, and are more likely to be taking psychiatric medication. They have more impairment in their work and social functioning and rate their health and life satisfaction lower. Despite the greater severity, they are not receiving additional psychological treatment, they feel they are not receiving the treatment they need, and they report more barriers to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the critical impact of comorbid anxiety on the course of BD in a large, nationally representative sample and reveals that the psychological treatment needs of this population are not being met. Clinical and research implications are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".