Sexual Activity and Risky Sexual Behaviour Amongst Canadian Youth With and at Risk for Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Despite substantial evidence in adults, data on sexual behaviour in youth with bipolar disorder (BD) are limited. We therefore examined this topic in youth with BD. METHOD: The study included 625 youth (n = 246 BD, n = 233 high risk for BD [BD-risk] and 146 healthy controls [HC]), ages 13-20 years. Semi-structured interviews evaluated diagnoses and treatment, as well as sexual activity, risky sexual behaviour (RSB) and reasons for RSB. Analyses compared lifetime sexual activity and RSB across the three groups and evaluated correlates of sexual activity and RSB within BD and BD-risk. RESULTS: Lifetime sexual activity and RSB were significantly higher amongst both BD and BD-risk youth versus HC. In univariate analyses, several overlapping clinical and suicide risk factors were associated with lifetime sexual activity amongst both BD and BD-risk youth. In multivariate analysis amongst BD youth, comorbid substance use disorder (SUD), post-traumatic stress disorder, and family history of anxiety were associated with lifetime sexual activity. In BD-risk youth, older age, lifetime depression severity, comorbid SUD and interpersonal chaos were associated with lifetime sexual activity. Affective lability and family history of suicide attempt were associated with RSB. CONCLUSIONS: Lifetime sexual activity was two-fold greater, and RSB was over fifteen-fold greater, amongst BD and BD-risk youth versus HCs. Understanding which demographic and clinical factors are associated with lifetime sexual activity amongst BD and BD-risk youth may enable us to identify youth more likely to engage in RSB and help us develop treatments and preventative strategies to avoid RSB accordingly.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".