SynthesisActa psychiatrica Scandinavica2026
Resilience in Bipolar Disorder Compared to Clinical and Non-Clinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Resilience in Bipolar Disorder Compared to Clinical and Non-Clinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionResilience is present in both clinical and non-clinical populations; yet, there is a paucity of literature examining its role in bipolar disorder (BD). The goal of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to substantiate the extant literature investigating resilience in BD in comparison to clinical and non-clinical populations.
methodPubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus were systematically searched from inception to August 8th, 2024.
resultsTwenty-eight studies using a validated resilience scale with a total of 3094 people with BD, 4100 healthy controls, and 1768 with other mental diagnoses were included in the systematic review, and 21 were analyzed in a random effects meta-analysis. A statistically significant result with a medium effect (SMD = -0.787, p < 0.001) indicated that people with BD reported lower levels of resilience than healthy controls. Similarly, patients with BD showed higher levels of resilience than patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) (SMD = 0.336, p = 0.013). No significant differences were found between BD and major depressive disorder (MDD).
conclusionFindings should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity observed and methodological challenges in the definition and measurement of resilience. Future research should aim to better characterize resilience in BD by improving its assessment as a standardized element of clinical evaluation. This will provide a basis for strategies to reduce the burden of this chronic condition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.