Psychiatric Polygenic Risk Scores and Week-by-Week Symptomatic Status in Youth with Bipolar Disorder: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Prior studies have demonstrated that, in both adults and youth, bipolar disorder (BD) is a polygenic illness. However, no studies have examined polygenic risk scores (PRSs) in relation to the longitudinal course of mood symptoms in youth with BD. Methods: This study included 246 youth of European ancestry with BD (7–20 years old at intake) from the Course and Outcome of Bipolar Youth study and Centre for Youth Bipolar Disorder. Mood symptom severity was assessed at intake and, for 168 participants, prospectively for a median of 8.7 years. PRSs for BD, schizophrenia (SCZ), major depressive disorder (MDD), and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were constructed using genome-wide summary statistics from independent adult cohorts. Results: Higher BD-PRS was significantly associated with lower most severe lifetime depression score at intake ( β = −0.14, p = 0.03). Higher SCZ-PRS and MDD-PRS were associated with significantly less time spent in euthymia (SCZ-PRS: β = −0.21, p = 0.02; MDD-PRS: β = −0.22, p = 0.01) and more time with any subsyndromal mood symptoms (i.e., any mania, mixed, or depression symptoms; SCZ-PRS: β = 0.15, p = 0.04; MDD-PRS: β = 0.17, p = 0.01) during follow-up. PRSs for BD and ADHD were not significantly associated with any longitudinal mood variable. Conclusions: This exploratory analysis was the first to examine psychiatric PRSs in relation to the prospective course of mood symptoms among youth with BD. Results from the current study can serve to guide future youth BD studies with larger sample sizes on this topic.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".