MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210892752 · doi:10.1016/j.jadr.2021.100265

GAD: Over-reactive and unstable mood

2021· article· en· W3210892752 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodPsychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective We sought to clarify if over-reactive mood in Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) could be misdiagnosed as mood swings of Bipolar Disorder, or with affective instability in Borderline Personality Disorder. Methods We re-assessed 32 subjects who were referred to our clinic in 2020 and had been previously diagnosed with Bipolar and Borderline Personality Disorders, as they seem to fit more the diagnostic criteria of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), based on the structured clinical interview for DSM5 (SCID-DSM5) and our previously published general definition of this disorder. All the subjects met the DSM5 criteria of GAD and presented with excessive anxiety and worry lasting more than 6 months in different situations or spontaneous with no triggers, leading to dysfunctions in social, occupational, or any other important areas of the individual's life. The subjects also met our general definition of GAD and met the DSM5 diagnostic criteria for Social Anxiety Disorder, Panic Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder. Moreover some of these subjects had an over-reactive mood that was subjectively labeled by themselves as “mood swings”, but without any discreet hypomanic or manic episodes. Some of the subjects also described their mood as "unstable" that had led their previous clinicians with mislableing them with "affective instability" leading to the misdiagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder. Results The result of the study showed that the over-reactive mood in GAD could simply by the patients be interpreted as mood swings and when reported to the physicians, diagnosed as Bipolar Disorder. In the same token the unstable mood in GAD could be taken as affective instability by the patients and the physicians, leading to the misdiagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder. Other than mood over-reactivity and unstable mood in this sample that led their previous misdiagnoses with Bipolar and Borderline Personality Disorders, they were all presented with the symptoms of GAD like others without over-reactive and unstable mood. Conclusion The findings of our present adds a new symptom of over-reactive mood in GAD that could be easily misinterpreted as mood swings and affective instability and misdiagnosed as Bipolar and Borderline Personality Disorders.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.306 · 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