Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31956923›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of bipolar disorders2020

Bipolar disorders in ICD-11: current status and strengths.

Jules Angst, Vladeta Ajdacic-Gross, Wulf Rössler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of bipolar disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Addressing the unmet needs of bipolar disorder in Australia and beyond.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Diagnosing bipolar disorders: ICD-11 and beyond.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jules AngstDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. jules.angst@uzh.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5186-1690
Vladeta Ajdacic-GrossDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Wulf RösslerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines for the ICD-11 Classification of mental and behavioural disorders should soon be finalized. To measure their potential impact, the new proposed definitions of bipolar disorders in ICD-11 were applied to data from the Zurich cohort study and compared with the definitions of ICD-10 and DSM-5.

resultsWe found little difference between ICD-11 and ICD-10 in the identification of subjects with bipolar disorders, but compared to DSM-5 a considerable increase in the diagnosis of hypomanic episodes and therefore of bipolar-II disorders.

conclusionsCompared to ICD-10 and DSM-5 the definition of hypomanic episodes according to ICD-11 represents important progress. A higher prevalence of BP-II disorder makes sense from a clinical point of view. Further transcultural research is needed into whether out-patient treatment should be included as a criterion for hypomania. Pure mania is unfortunately missing as an independent and codable disorder in the international diagnostic manuals, whether ICD-11 or DSM-5.

Indexed as

BipolarDSM-5ICD-10ICD-11

Identifiers

PMID31956923
PMCPMC6970089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.