All-cause and cause-specific mortality among people with bipolar disorder: a large-scale systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Bipolar disorder (BD) is associated with premature mortality. All-cause and specific mortality risks in this population remain unclear, and more studies are still needed to further understand this issue and guide individual and public strategies to prevent mortality in bipolar disorder Thus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing mortality risk in people with BD versus the general population was conducted. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, whilst secondary outcomes were mortality due to suicide, natural, unnatural, and specific-causes mortality. RESULTS: Fifty-seven studies were included (BD; n = 678,353). All-cause mortality was increased in people with BD (RR = 2.02, 95% CI: 1.89-2.16, k = 39). Specific-cause mortality was highest for suicide (RR = 11.69, 95% CI: 9.22-14.81, k = 25). Risk of death due to unnatural causes (RR = 7.29, 95% CI: 6.41-8.28, k = 17) and natural causes (RR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.75-2.06, k = 17) were also increased. Among specific natural causes analyzed, infectious causes had the higher RR (RR = 4,38, 95%CI: 1.5-12.69, k = 3), but the analysis was limited by the inclusion of few studies. Mortality risk due to respiratory (RR = 3.18, 95% CI: 2.55-3.96, k = 6), cardiovascular (RR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.53-2.01, k = 27), and cerebrovascular (RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.34-1.84, k = 13) causes were increased as well. No difference was identified in mortality by cancer (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.88-1.11, k = 16). Subgroup analyses and meta-regression did not affect the findings. CONCLUSION: Results presented in this meta-analysis show that risk of premature death in BD is not only due to suicide and unnatural causes, but somatic comorbidities are also implicated. Not only the prevention of suicide, but also the promotion of physical health and the prevention of physical conditions in individuals with BD may mitigate the premature mortality in this population. Notwithstanding this is to our knowledge the largest synthesis of evidence on BD-related mortality, further well-designed studies are still warranted to inform this field.
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 | 0.011 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".