Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and anxiety disorders as precursors of bipolar disorder onset in adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and anxiety disorders have been proposed as precursors of bipolar disorder, but their joint and relative roles in the development of bipolar disorder are unknown.AimsTo test the prospective relationship of ADHD and anxiety with onset of bipolar disorder. METHOD: We examined the relationship between ADHD, anxiety disorders and bipolar disorder in a birth cohort of 2 409 236 individuals born in Denmark between 1955 and 1991. Individuals were followed from their sixteenth birthday or from January 1995 to their first clinical contact for bipolar disorder or until December 2012. We calculated incidence rates per 10 000 person-years and tested the effects of prior diagnoses on the risk of bipolar disorder in survival models. RESULTS: Over 37 394 865 person-years follow-up, 9250 onsets of bipolar disorder occurred. The incidence rate of bipolar disorder was 2.17 (95% CI 2.12-2.19) in individuals with no prior diagnosis of ADHD or anxiety, 23.86 (95% CI 19.98-27.75) in individuals with a prior diagnosis of ADHD only, 26.05 (95% CI 24.47-27.62) in individuals with a prior diagnosis of anxiety only and 66.16 (95% CI 44.83-87.47) in those with prior diagnoses of both ADHD and anxiety. The combination of ADHD and anxiety increased the risk of bipolar disorder 30-fold (95% CI 21.66-41.40) compared with those with no prior ADHD or anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Early manifestations of both internalising and externalising psychopathology indicate liability to bipolar disorder. The combination of ADHD and anxiety is associated with a very high risk of bipolar disorder.Declaration of interestNone.
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) | 0.000 | 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".