A Consecutive Series of Treated Affected Offspring of Parents with Bipolar Disorder: Is Response Associated with the Clinical Profile?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In adults with established bipolar disorder (BD), differential response to mood stabilizers has been associated with the clinical profile. Long-term treatment studies of youth with BD are lacking. This paper provides longitudinal observations of response to mood stabilizers early in the course of illness in youth with BD. METHOD: We report on 15 research patients who, as adolescents, met DSM-IV lifetime criteria for a bipolar spectrum disorder and required long-term treatment. These youths derived from families with one parent having BD whose course and long-term treatment response were determined in accordance with research criteria. The patients were offered lithium, and if they failed to respond or refused it, they were treated with either an anticonvulsant or an atypical antipsychotic. Using a validated scale, an independent rater retrospectively blindly scored the response to long-term treatment. RESULTS: Those patients who stabilized on lithium derived from lithium-responsive families, whereas those who stabilized on an antipsychotic derived from lithium-nonresponsive families. The clinical course in the youths stabilized by lithium differed from that in the youths stabilized by an atypical antipsychotic. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the clinical profile may help in selecting effective stabilizing treatment and that a proportion of youth can be stabilized on monotherapy. This is a small case series with nonrandom treatment assignment, and the findings should be considered tentative.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".