Effect of optimized treatment on the postpartum recurrence in women with bipolar I disorder: A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• This case series describes the postpartum course of BDI among high-risk women receiving optimized treatment aimed specifically at the prevention of mania. • A targeted treatment approach including the provision of information about the effect of pregnancy and postpartum on the course of the disorder, close monitoring, early detection of emerging symptoms, and treatment aimed at the prevention of manic/mixed episodes contributed to the positive outcome in the postpartum period. • Multicenter studies are necessary to assess the effect of a multimodal treatment including psychoeducation, social rhythm therapy, and targeted pharmacotherapy in the prevention of postpartum recurrence in women with BDI. Women with bipolar I disorder are at a high risk of recurrence postpartum. This case series describes the postpartum course of bipolar I disorder among women receiving optimized treatment aimed specifically at the prevention of mania. Clinical records of 12 pregnant females with bipolar I disorder who were seen consecutively at a perinatal clinic between 2020 and 2023 were reviewed to assess the effect of treatment including psychoeducation, good sleep hygiene, avoidance of antidepressants, and use of sedating atypical antipsychotics on postpartum recurrence. All except one patient had been hospitalized for bipolar disorder. The mean follow-up period was 56 ± 73 weeks postpartum. Only two patients (16.7%) had a relapse (both depression) during the postpartum period. No one required psychiatric hospitalization. Small sample size, retrospective design, and lack of comparison group. Combining psychoeducation, social rhythm therapy, and targeted pharmacotherapy may be effective in the prevention of postpartum recurrence in women with bipolar I disorder.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".