MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792027821 · doi:10.1111/bdi.12609

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (<scp>CANMAT</scp>) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (<scp>ISBD</scp>) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

2018· article· en· W2792027821 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lakshmi N. Yatham, Sidney H. Kennedy, Sagar V. Parikh, Ayal Schaffer, David J. Bond, Benício N. Frey, Verinder Sharma, Benjamin I. Goldstein, Soham Rej, Serge Beaulieu, Martin Alda, Glenda MacQueen, Roumen Milev, Arun Ravindran, Claire O’Donovan, Diane McIntosh, Raymond W. Lam, Gustavo Vázquez, Flávio Kapczinski, Roger S. McIntyre, Jan Kozicky, Shigenobu Kanba, Beny Lafer, Trisha Suppes, Joseph R. Calabrese, Eduard Vieta, Gin S. Malhi, Robert M. Post, Michael Berk

Bibliographic record

VenueBipolar Disorders · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilH. Lundbeck A/SBeyond BlueBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and DepressionAllerganNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Network for Mood and Anxiety TreatmentsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSunovionServierPfizerGeelong Region Medical Research FoundationPurdue UniversityNova Scotia Health Research Foundation
KeywordsBipolar disorderAnxietyMoodPsychiatryPsychologyMood disordersClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.009

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations1,770
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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