Longitudinal course and risk factors associated with psychosis in bipolar youths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the longitudinal clinical course of youths with bipolar disorder (BD) spectrum with lifetime (past, intake, and/or follow-up) psychosis (BDP+) to youths with BD without lifetime psychosis (BDP-). Also, to identify risk factors associated with increased risk of first onset of psychosis during prospective follow-up. METHOD: Bipolar disorder youths (BDP+ = 137, BDP- = 233), aged 7-17 years old, were followed on average every 7 months for 11.7 years and were evaluated using standardized instruments. Data were analyzed using linear and generalized linear models for the full sample, as well as for youths who developed first period of psychosis (n = 55). RESULTS: After adjusting for confounders, BDP+ youths with one, and in particular ≥2 lifetime psychotic episodes, had higher rates and more severe mood and anxiety symptoms, higher rates of suicidality, psychiatric hospitalizations, and sexual/physical abuse, and poorer psychosocial functioning than BDP- youths. Even before the first onset of psychosis during follow-up, BDP+ youths showed more psychopathology and had more family history of psychiatric illness than those who never developed psychosis. First-onset psychosis was associated with low socioeconomic status (SES), living with one parent, bipolar disorder type one and type two, comorbid anxiety, history of hospitalizations, and family history of mania and suicidality. CONCLUSION: BDP+ is associated with poor prognosis and worse clinical picture, even before the onset of psychosis, indicating the need for prompt identification and treatment of these youths. Studies aimed to treat acute symptoms of psychosis, as well as prevent the onset of psychosis, including risk factors amenable to change, are warranted.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".