Characteristics of depression among offspring at high and low familial risk of bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Having a parent with bipolar disorder (BP) is a very strong risk factor for developing BP. Similarly, depression among youth is a clinical risk factor for subsequent BP. We evaluated whether mood symptomatology in depressed youth is different between those at high and low familial risk to develop BP. METHODS: The most severe major depressive episode in BP offspring (N=61) and community control offspring (N=20) was evaluated using expanded depression and mania rating scales derived from the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for Children Present Version. The results were adjusted for any between-group significant demographic differences and for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: <.05). The depressive symptoms were helpful to identify a high-risk group (e.g., odds ratio [OR] for hypersomnia: 22.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-404, P=.04). In addition, there were significantly more depressed offspring of BP parents with subsyndromal manic symptoms than controls (52.5% vs 20%, OR: 4.2, 95% CI: 1.2-14.7, P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: Depressed BP offspring had more severe depression including atypical depressive symptoms, and were more likely to have subsyndromal mixed manic symptoms than depressed control offspring. Prospective studies to evaluate whether these youth are at high risk to develop BP are warranted. If replicated, the results of this study have important clinical (e.g., treatment of depression in depressed offspring of BP parents) and research implications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".