Parenting practices in middle childhood mediate the relation between growing up with a parent having bipolar disorder and offspring psychopathology from childhood into early adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The offspring of parents with bipolar disorder (OBD) are at high risk for developing mental disorders. In addition to genetic factors, environmental risk is purported to be associated with these negative outcomes. However, few studies have examined this relation. Using concurrent and longitudinal data, we examined if support, structure, and control provided by parents in middle childhood mediated the relation between having a parent with or without bipolar disorder, and offspring mental health. The sample included 145 offspring (77 OBD, 68 controls) aged 4 to 14 years and their parents. Parent and teacher ratings of child behavior were collected, and diagnostic assessments were conducted in offspring 12 years later (n = 101). Bootstrapping analyses showed that low levels of structure mediated the relation between having a parent with bipolar disorder and elevated internalizing and externalizing difficulties during middle childhood. For the longitudinal outcomes, parental control emerged as the strongest mediator of the relation between parents' bipolar disorder and offspring psychopathology. Suboptimal childrearing may have different immediate and enduring consequences on mental health outcomes in the OBD. Parental structure has robust effects on emotional and behavioral problems in middle childhood, while levels of control promote psychological adjustment in the OBD as they mature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".