MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297502238 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101678

Comparative effectiveness of valproic acid in different serum concentrations for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder: A retrospective cohort study using target trial emulation framework

2022· article· en· W4297502238 on OpenAlexaff
Yang‐Chieh Brian Chen, Chih‐Sung Liang, Liang‐Jen Wang, Kuo‐Chuan Hung, André F. Carvalho, Marco Solmi, Eduard Vieta, Ping‐Tao Tseng, Pao‐Yen Lin, Yu‐Kang Tu, Chih‐Wei Hsu, Edward Chia‐Cheng Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanChang Gung Memorial Hospital
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineMoodValproic AcidBipolar disorderRetrospective cohort studyCohortConfidence intervalMood stabilizerCohort studyLower riskSubgroup analysisGastroenterologyPsychiatryEpilepsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There is a lack of consensus on the optimal serum valproic acid (VPA) concentration for maintenance therapy in bipolar disorder (BD). We aimed to investigate the association between serum VPA levels and risk of mood episode recurrence. Methods: We enrolled patients with BD from multiple medical institutions in Taiwan between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2019. Patients were divided into three groups according to their serum VPA concentrations (< 50 μg/ml, 50-74 μg/ml, and 75-104 μg/ml). Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) compared times to mood episode recurrence using the < 50 μg/ml group as reference. A systematic review found relevant articles published before February 2022 (PROSPERO: CRD42022309661), and corresponding results were compared. Findings: This cohort included 896 patients for an intention-to-treat analysis. Compared with the < 50 μg/ml group, a non-significantly lower risk of mood episode recurrence was found in the 50-74 μg/ml (aHR, 95% CI: 0·86, 0·71-1·05) and 75-104 μg/ml (0·91, 0·71-1·18) groups. A per-protocol analysis of 481 patients found a significant risk reduction in the 50-74 μg/ml group (0·76, 0·60-0·97), with inconclusive results in the ≥ 75 μg/ml group (1·03, 0·73-1·46). A meta-analysis including two studies (254 patients) and our cohort found a similar significantly lower risk of mood episode recurrence in the 50-74 μg/ml group (HR, 95% CI: 0·83, 0·69-0·99), while risk reduction in the 75-99 μg/ml group (0·62, 0·26-1·48) did not differ significantly from that in the < 50 μg/ml group or the 50-74 μg/ml group. Interpretation: The combined results of this cohort and previous studies suggest that VPA between 50-74 μg/ml may be a more effective concentration to prevent acute mood episodes during maintenance therapy in patients with BD compared with VPA < 50 μg/ml. Funding: Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, and Chang Gung Medical Research Project.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207