Positive mental health in adults with bipolar disorder: exploring social support subtypes, negative social interactions and potential to flourish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder (BD) (i.e., BD-I or BD-II) is a serious mental illness (SMI) that can cause significant life challenges, but its impact and management may be mediated by psychosocial factors. This study's primary objectives were to investigate whether adults with BD differ from those without in terms of social support, negative social interactions (NSIs), and positive mental health (PMH). Secondly, examine whether gender differences exist in terms of these variables, as well as whether specific social support subscales and NSI predict PMH for those with BD. METHODS: Using data extracted from a national Canadian survey, 563 adults reporting a lifetime BD diagnosis were compared to a matched, non-BD sample using the Social Provisions Scale 10 Items (SPS-10), the NSI Scale, and the Mental Health Continuum - Short Form (MHC-SF) Scale. For the BD sample, males and females were compared based on study variables, and hierarchical regressions were subsequently performed to assess whether SPS-10 subscales and NSIs predicted PMH. RESULTS: Respondents with BD reported significantly lower SPS-10 and PMH scores, and significantly higher NSI scores. Within the BD sample, females reported significantly higher SPS-10 and NSIs scores, and 'social integration' and 'reassurance of worth' positively predicted PMH, while NSI uniquely predicted lower PMH levels for both males and females. CONCLUSIONS: The results implicate specific psychosocial factors and gender in the degree to which adults with BD might flourish, particularly in terms negative relationships. The implications of social erosion and the bi-directionality of social support are also considered.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".