MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394932987 · doi:10.1186/s12991-024-00498-x

A bibliometric and visual analysis of cognitive function in bipolar disorder from 2012 to 2022

2024· article· en· W4394932987 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaohong Cui, Tailian Xue, Zhiyong Zhang, Hong Yang, Yan Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of General Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanxi Scholarship Council of ChinaHealth Commission of Shanxi Province
KeywordsBipolar disorderNeurocognitiveCognitionClinical psychologyPsychologyManiaHypomaniaPsychiatryGeriatric psychiatryYoung Mania Rating ScaleMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a chronic psychiatric disorder that combines hypomania or mania and depression. The study aims to investigate the research areas associated with cognitive function in bipolar disorder and identify current research hotspots and frontier areas in this field. METHODOLOGY: Publications related to cognitive function in BD from 2012 to 2022 were searched on the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database. VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Scimago Graphica were used to conduct this bibliometric analysis. RESULTS: A total of 989 articles on cognitive function in BD were included in this review. These articles were mainly from the United States, China, Canada, Spain and the United Kingdom. Our results showed that the journal "Journal of Affective Disorders" published the most articles. Apart from "Biploar disorder" and "cognitive function", the terms "Schizophrenia", "Meta analysis", "Rating scale" were also the most frequently used keywords. The research on cognitive function in bipolar disorder primarily focused on the following aspects: subgroup, individual, validation and pathophysiology. CONCLUSIONS: The current concerns and hotspots in the filed are: "neurocognitive impairment", "subgroup", "1st degree relative", "mania", "individual" and "validation". Future research is likely to focus on the following four themes: "Studies of the bipolar disorder and cognitive subgroups", "intra-individual variability", "Validation of cognitive function tool" and "Combined with pathology or other fields".

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0220.039
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of General PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207