Translating big data to better treatment in bipolar disorder - a manifesto for coordinated action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bipolar disorder (BD) is a major healthcare and socio-economic challenge. Despite its substantial burden on society, the research activity in BD is much smaller than its economic impact appears to demand. There is a consensus that the accurate identification of the underlying pathophysiology for BD is fundamental to realize major health benefits through better treatment and preventive regimens. However, to achieve these goals requires coordinated action and innovative approaches to boost the discovery of the neurobiological underpinnings of BD, and rapid translation of research findings into development and testing of better and more specific treatments. To this end, we here propose that only a large-scale coordinated action can be successful in integrating international big-data approaches with real-world clinical interventions. This could be achieved through the creation of a Global Bipolar Disorder Foundation, which could bring government, industry and philanthropy together in common cause. A global initiative for BD research would come at a highly opportune time given the seminal advances promised for our understanding of the genetic and brain basis of the disease and the obvious areas of unmet clinical need. Such an endeavour would embrace the principles of open science and see the strong involvement of user groups and integration of dissemination and public involvement with the research programs. We believe the time is right for a step change in our approach to understanding, treating and even preventing BD effectively.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".