Optimal Well-Being After Psychopathology: Prevalence and Correlates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimal functioning after psychopathology is understudied. We report the prevalence of optimal well-being (OWB) following recovery after depression, suicidal ideation, generalized anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, and substance use disorders. Using a national Canadian sample ( N = 23,491), we operationalized OWB as absence of 12-month psychopathology, coupled with scoring above the 25th national percentile on psychological well-being and below the 25th percentile on disability measures. Compared with 24.1% of participants without a history of psychopathology, 9.8% of participants with a lifetime history of psychopathology met OWB. Adults with a history of substance use disorders (10.2%) and depression (7.1%) were the most likely to report OWB. Persons with anxiety (5.7%), suicidal ideation (5.0%), bipolar I (3.3%), and bipolar II (3.2%) were less likely to report OWB. Having a lifetime history of just one disorder increased the odds of OWB by a factor of 4.2 relative to having a lifetime history of multiple disorders. Although psychopathology substantially reduces the probability of OWB, many individuals with psychopathology attain OWB.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".