Prediction of medical admissions after psychiatric inpatient hospitalization in bipolar disorder: a retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Bipolar Disorder (BD) is a severe mental illness associated with high rates of general medical comorbidity, reduced life expectancy, and premature mortality. Although BD has been associated with high medical hospitalization, the factors that contribute to this risk remain largely unexplored. We used baseline medical and psychiatric records to develop a supervised machine learning model to predict general medical admissions after discharge from psychiatric hospitalization. Methods: In this retrospective three-year cohort study of 71 patients diagnosed with BD (mean age=52.19 years, females=56.33%), lasso regression models combining medical and psychiatric records, as well as those using them separately, were fitted and their predictive power was estimated using a leave-one-out cross-validation procedure. Results: The proportion of medical admissions in patients with BD was higher compared with age- and sex-matched hospitalizations in the same region (25.4% vs. 8.48%). The lasso model fairly accurately predicted the outcome (area under the curve [AUC]=69.5%, 95%C.I.=55-84.1; sensitivity=61.1%, specificity=75.5%, balanced accuracy=68.3%). Notably, pre-existing cardiovascular, neurological, or osteomuscular diseases collectively accounted for more than 90% of the influence on the model. The accuracy of the model based on medical records was slightly inferior (AUC=68.7%, 95%C.I. = 54.6-82.9), while that of the model based on psychiatric records only was below chance (AUC=61.8%, 95%C.I.=46.2-77.4). Conclusion: Our findings support the need to monitor medical comorbidities during clinical decision-making to tailor and implement effective preventive measures in people with BD. Further research with larger sample sizes and prospective cohorts is warranted to replicate these findings and validate the predictive model.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".