MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754750033 · doi:10.1111/bdi.12534

Methodological recommendations for cognition trials in bipolar disorder by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force

2017· article· en· W2754750033 on OpenAlexaff
Kamilla Woznica Miskowiak, KE Burdick, Anabel Martínez‐Arán, Caterina del Mar Bonnín, CR Bowie, AF Carvalho, Peter Gallagher, Beny Lafer, Carlos López‐Jaramillo, Tomiki Sumiyoshi, RS McIntyre, Ayal Schaffer, RJ Porter, IJ Torres, Lakshmi N. Yatham, Allan H. Young, Lars Vedel Kessing, Eduard Vieta

Bibliographic record

VenueBipolar Disorders · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaBrain and Cognition Discovery FoundationQueen's University
FundersAllerganH. Lundbeck A/SServierLundbeckfondenSunovionTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchPfizerInternational Society for Bipolar DisordersCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud MentalSanofiAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsCognitionBipolar disorderPsychologyClinical trialMoodSystematic reviewPsychiatryRandomized controlled trialClinical psychologyMedicineMEDLINEPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To aid the development of treatment for cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder, the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) convened a task force to create a consensus-based guidance paper for the methodology and design of cognition trials in bipolar disorder. METHODS: The task force was launched in September 2016, consisting of 18 international experts from nine countries. A series of methodological issues were identified based on literature review and expert opinion. The issues were discussed and expanded upon in an initial face-to-face meeting, telephone conference call and email exchanges. Based upon these exchanges, recommendations were achieved. RESULTS: Key methodological challenges are: lack of consensus on how to screen for entry into cognitive treatment trials, define cognitive impairment, track efficacy, assess functional implications, and manage mood symptoms and concomitant medication. Task force recommendations are to: (i) enrich trials with objectively measured cognitively impaired patients; (ii) generally select a broad cognitive composite score as the primary outcome and a functional measure as a key secondary outcome; and (iii) include remitted or partly remitted patients. It is strongly encouraged that trials exclude patients with current substance or alcohol use disorders, neurological disease or unstable medical illness, and keep non-study medications stable. Additional methodological considerations include neuroimaging assessments, targeting of treatments to illness stage and using a multimodal approach. CONCLUSIONS: This ISBD task force guidance paper provides the first consensus-based recommendations for cognition trials in bipolar disorder. Adherence to these recommendations will likely improve the sensitivity in detecting treatment efficacy in future trials and increase comparability between 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.677
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.776
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.6770.776
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.034
Bibliometrics0.0150.013
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0170.008
Open science0.0150.012
Research integrity0.0350.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.012

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.

Opus teacher head0.123
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations215
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBipolar DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207