Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35787043›Full record

Trial reportProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022

Using a generative model of affect to characterize affective variability and its response to treatment in bipolar disorder.

Erdem Pulcu, Kate E A Saunders, Catherine J Harmer, Paul J Harrison, Guy M Goodwin, John R Geddes, Michael Browning

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Computational models of subjective feelings in psychiatry.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2023
    Review
  9. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Erdem PulcuDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2170-0677
Kate E A SaundersDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Catherine J HarmerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Paul J HarrisonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Guy M GoodwinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
John R GeddesDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Michael BrowningDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9108-3144
National Health Service · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N008103/1UKRI | Medical Research Council (MRC) MR/N008103/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 102,616/ZWellcome Trust 98,461/Z/12/ZWellcome Trust (WT) 461/Z/12/ZWellcome Trust (WT) 616/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The affective variability of bipolar disorder (BD) is thought to qualitatively differ from that of borderline personality disorder (BPD), with changes in affect persisting longer in BD. However, quantitative studies have not been able to confirm this distinction. It has therefore not been possible to accurately quantify how treatments like lithium influence affective variability in BD. We assessed the affective variability associated with BD and BPD as well as the effect of lithium using a computational model that defines two subtypes of variability: affective changes that persist (volatility) and changes that do not (noise). We hypothesized that affective volatility would be raised in the BD group, noise would be raised in the BPD group, and that lithium would impact affective volatility. Daily affect ratings were prospectively collected for up to 3 y from patients with BD or BPD and nonclinical controls. In a separate experimental medicine study, patients with BD were randomized to receive lithium or placebo, with affect ratings collected from week -2 to +4. We found a diagnostically specific pattern of affective variability. Affective volatility was raised in patients with BD, whereas affective noise was raised in patients with BPD. Rather than suppressing affective variability, lithium increased the volatility of positive affect in both studies. These results provide a quantitative measure of the affective variability associated with BD and BPD. They suggest a mechanism of action for lithium, whereby periods of persistently low or high affect are avoided by increasing the volatility of affective responses.

Indexed as

Bipolar DisorderAffectBorderline Personality DisorderComputer SimulationHumansLithiumLithiumaffectbipolar disordercomputational modelinglithium

Identifiers

PMID35787043
PMCPMC9282445
OpenAlexW4283837558

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.