The perceived social support of parents having bipolar disorder impacts their children’s mental health: a 10-year longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The offspring of parents with bipolar disorder (OBD) are at higher risk of developing psychopathology than the offspring of parents with no affective disorder (control). In addition to genetic predisposition, childhood adversity and a stressful family environment are important risk factors for the OBD. Protective factors in parents, such as social support and coping strategies, may buffer the effects of stress on at-risk children. This study tested whether parents' social support and coping style attenuated the link between risk status (OBD vs. control) and psychopathology in offspring. METHODS: During offspring's middle childhood, parents underwent a diagnostic interview and completed social support and coping style questionnaires. Sixty-nine OBD (39 female) and 69 control (29 female) offspring between ages 13 and 29 completed a diagnostic interview approximately 10 years later. RESULTS: Parents' social support satisfaction moderated the link between offspring risk status and their development of substance use disorder (SUD) symptoms (F(1,131) = 5.90, p = .017). Parents' social network size moderated the link between offspring risk status and their development of anxiety and depression symptoms in an unexpected direction (F(1,131) = 5.07, p = .026). No effects of parents' coping style were found. CONCLUSIONS: Among the OBD, having parents with greater social support satisfaction and, unexpectedly, a smaller social network buffered their development of SUD and depression and anxiety symptoms by early adulthood. Parents' social support may thus have a protective function for children in these high-risk families.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".