Bipolar disorder progression to dementia with frontal features. A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A subset of patients with bipolar disorder (BD) develop a midlife cognitive/behavioral decline that overlaps with the clinical features of behavioral variant Frontotemporal Dementia (bvFTD). Several case reports and case series have described different clinical features and outcomes of a frontal cognitive/behavioral decline in patients with history of BD. Given that this presentation is scarcely reported, a first step to better characterize this specific condition is to perform an evidence synthesis report. Objective: This scoping review protocol aims to describe and characterize the different patterns of frontal cognitive/behavioral decline in patients with history of BD. Information sources: Studies will be retrieved from MEDLINE (PubMed), PsychINFO, EMBASE and Google Scholar, no other sources will be considered. Inclusion criteria: Studies describing patients with an established diagnosis of BD preceding a later development of dementia with frontal cognitive/behavioral decline. Exclusion criteria: Studies written in languages different than Spanish or English or French that could not be appropriately translated, or whose full text files could not be retrieved, and studies describing manic or BD symptoms, but not an antecedent history consistent with bipolar disorder, as a clear prodrome of bvFTD diagnosis. Data will be extracted by two researchers and verified by agreement. This protocol complies with the PRISMA-P, PRISMA ScR and JBI manual for evidence synthesis scoping review guidelines.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".