Randomized Controlled Trials of Psychoeducation Modalities in the Management of Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This review sought to summarize the extant literature on the efficacy of 4 modalities of psychoeducation (individual, group, family, internet- based) in the management of patients with bipolar disorder. DATA SOURCES: We searched the digital databases (Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE) for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertaining to psychoeducation in bipolar disorder from inception to February 2017. Keywords and combinations used included psychoeducation, bipolar disorder, individual, family, group, and internet. Reference lists of review articles were also used for retrieval of relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: We retrieved 48 studies and ultimately reviewed 40 RCTs meeting inclusion criteria. Studies were included if they were in English, were RCTs of different psychoeducation modalities managing patients with bipolar disorder, and used standardized assessment of outcomes of psychoeducation. DATA EXTRACTION: We examined each of the selected publications for relevant data. RESULTS: The majority of psychoeducation RCTs (28 of 40 studies, 70.0%) focused on group and family psychoeducation, with positive benefits reported in clinical outcomes, treatment, and functioning measures. Group psychoeducation was associated with reduced illness recurrences, decreased number and duration of hospitalizations, increased time to illness relapse, better treatment adherence, higher therapeutic lithium levels, and reduced stigma. Family psychoeducation was associated with reductions in illness recurrence, hospitalization rates, and better illness trajectory as well as increased caregiver knowledge, skills, support, and sense of well-being and reduced caregiver burden. There are fewer RCTs on individual and internet-based psychoeducation, with findings being inconsistent or negative. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies may include direct comparisons of different psychoeducation modalities to elucidate specific benefits of unique psychoeducation interventions at different phases of bipolar disorder.
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 | 0.018 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".