MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414332454 · doi:10.2196/78163

Differentiating Pediatric Bipolar Disorder, Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, and Other Psychopathologies Using Self-Reported Mood and Energy Data and Actigraphy Findings: Correlation and Machine Learning–Based Prediction of Mood Severity

2025· article· en· W4414332454 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Halimah Abdul‐waalee, Jonathan Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsActigraphyMoodCorrelationEnergy (signal processing)Mood disorders

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Distinguishing pediatric bipolar disorder (BD) from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is challenging due to overlapping fluctuations in mood, energy, and activity. Combining objective actigraphy with self-reported mood and energy data may aid differential diagnosis and risk monitoring. Objective: This study aimed to test same-day associations between actigraphy-derived activity extremes and self-reported mood and energy, and to evaluate whether these measures predict same-day and next-day severe mood in adolescents with BD, ADHD, and other diagnoses. Methods: We analyzed 209 inpatients (2148 patient-days) across 4 groups (ADHD without BD: n=54; BD with ADHD: n=42; BD without ADHD: n=34; other diagnoses: n=79). Actigraphy data (Philips Actiwatch 2) were summarized into daily maximum and minimum quartiles (Max1-Max4 and Min1-Min4). Mood and Energy Thermometer (-10 to +10) ratings were categorized as follows: OK (<3), mild (3-4), moderate (5-6), and severe (>6). Group differences used Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction (P<.004). Associations used chi-square tests with Cramér V. Leak-safe machine learning (patient-wise GroupKFold) classified SevereDay (same day) and SevereTomorrow (next day) using actigraphy, sleep, energy, and demographic data. Results: BD without ADHD showed the tightest coupling of extreme activity with negative mood and energy (Cramér V of up to 0.24; P<.004). ADHD without BD showed stronger links between activity and positive energy. Machine learning achieved a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.85, an accuracy of 0.79, and an F1-score of 0.67 for SevereDay. SevereTomorrow performance was moderate (ROC-AUC=0.80; accuracy=0.79; F1-score=0.60). Energy variability and actigraphy averages/peaks were the top predictors. Conclusions: Integrating actigraphy, sleep, and daily energy ratings identifies severe mood days and provides early next-day risk signals in hospitalized adolescents. The findings support wearable-based phenotyping for precision monitoring, with external validation needed in outpatients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental Health→Same topicBipolar Disorder and Treatment→French-language works237,207→