MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377098044 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1179733

Cigarette smoking and risk of suicide in bipolar disorder: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4377098044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jesús García-Jiménez, Francisco José Gómez-Sierra, Alicia Martínez-Hortelano, Paula Moreno-Merino, B. Girela Serrano, Patricio Molero, Luís Gutiérrez-Rojas

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBipolar disorderCochrane LibraryPsychiatryPopulationMEDLINESystematic reviewScopusMeta-analysisInternal medicineEnvironmental healthMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a highly prevalent, chronic and recurrent mental illness. The smoking rates in patients with BD are much higher than those of the general population, and BD is associated with an increased risk of suicide. An association between smoking and suicidal behavior has been found in the general population, this systematic review examines whether there is evidence of an association between smoking and suicide behavior in patients with BD. Method: A database search was carried out in Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, updated until December 31st, 2021, according to the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. We identified prospective and retrospective studies that included patients diagnosed with BD types I, II, and not otherwise specified, and in which smoking and suicidal behavior were correlated. Articles that focused exclusively on other mental disorders were excluded. The Ottawa-Newcastle scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included articles. Results: = 7,395) met all the inclusion criteria. In nine of these articles, the authors found an association between smoking and suicidal behavior in BD, while in the remaining six articles, this association was not found. A great deal of variability was observed between articles, particularly in the measurement of suicidal behavior and tobacco consumption. The risk of bias, as assessed by the NOS, was high for most of the included articles, except for two papers, whose risk was low. Conclusion: It was not possible to establish a clear relationship between tobacco use and the risk of suicide in BD patients due to the heterogeneity of the articles included in this systematic review, which had different sample sizes and methodological issues. However, both conditions are highly prevalent and have a negative impact on the prognosis of BD. Therefore, a systematic approach is needed, based on accurate measurement of a patient's smoking habits and their risk of suicidal behavior, in order to establish an appropriate therapeutic plan. Additional information: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors and was registered on PROSPERO with the CRD42022301570 on January 21th 2022.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207