MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W38220687 · doi:10.1177/070674370905400208

Course and Outcome after the First Manic Episode in Patients with Bipolar Disorder: Prospective 12-Month Data from the Systematic Treatment Optimization Program for Early Mania Project

2009· article· en· W38220687 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lakshmi N. Yatham, Marcia Kauer‐Sant’Anna, David J. Bond, Raymond W. Lam, Ivan J. Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManiaBipolar disorderMoodPsychologyMood stabilizerPsychiatryPediatricsClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical characteristics, course, and outcome during a 1-year period after the first manic episode in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). METHODS: This paper describes the project design, demographics, clinical outcomes, and predictors at 6 months to 1 year of follow-up of the first 53 recruited subjects with first-episode mania from the Systematic Treatment Optimization Program for Early Mania. RESULTS: Survival analysis for recurrence of mood episodes showed that 46.7% of patients survived without a mood episode during 1-year of follow-up, and the mean time-to-mood event was 7.9 months. Earlier age of onset was the only variable that significantly predicted recurrence of mood episodes. When examined separately, the survival rates were 76% for a manic episode and 58.7% for a depressive episode. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that recurrences are common after the first manic episode with more than one-half of the patients experiencing a mood event within 12 months. Aggressive treatment strategies aimed at preventing depressive episodes are needed in the management of early course BD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations98
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207