Late-Onset Bipolar Disorder: Considerations for Diagnosis and Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bipolar I disorder is characterized by the presence of at least one manic episode (DSM-5). Despite a decent percentage of individuals being diagnosed later in life, there currently exist no formal treatment guidelines for late-onset bipolar disorder (LOBD), which remains poorly understood. Typically, manic or manic-like episodes in elderly individuals can be thought of as arising from a secondary, physical cause. However, in the absence of a pre-existing neurological disorder - and when laboratory, imaging, and exam findings do not fully support a neurological picture - the determination of a structural versus primary etiology for LOBD becomes challenging. We present the case of Ms. S, a 79-year-old woman with a past psychiatry history of bipolar disorder diagnosed after 2012 and non-contributory past medical history who was admitted to a state mental hospital on a probate court order from local jail secondary to labile mood and physical aggression toward an officer. Initial labs were remarkable for slightly elevated low-density lipoprotein and a B12 at the lower limit of normal. She was started on a regiment oral B12 supplement, valproic acid 500 mg twice daily, haloperidol 5 mg nightly, and diphenhydramine 25 mg nightly. Despite her medication regimen, she continued to display marked mood lability, tangential thought processes, grandiose delusions, and paranoia. A CT head one week into admission revealed bilateral periventricular white-matter hyperintensities with decreased attenuation and chronic white-matter infarcts. She underwent five sessions of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), with significantly improving Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Young Mania Rating Scale scores. At the time of discharge on day 32, the patient was fully oriented to self and surroundings with good hygiene, a normal rate of speech, euthymic mood, and congruent affect. The case of Ms. S underscores the importance of a thorough workup to rule out secondary causes of mania. In addition, it is a clarion call for revisiting and researching a comprehensive management approach to LOBD, for which serial cognitive assessments and ECTs may play an important role.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".