ArticleBipolar disorders2026
Understanding the Current State of Play of Early Intervention for Bipolar Disorder: Qualitative Analysis of Consultations With International Stakeholders.
Article in Bipolar disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the burden associated with bipolar disorder (BD), research into early diagnosis and treatment of BD lags approximately 20 years behind the field of early intervention for psychosis. This study evolved through a partnership between Orygen (Melbourne, Australia) and the Daymark Foundation (Toronto, Canada). The primary focus was to answer the question: "How might we advance an early intervention approach for people at-risk of or with BD?".
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with international experts and other stakeholders in early intervention and BD to identify challenges and barriers in early intervention approaches to BD.
resultsTwenty-eight experts participated. Nine themes emerged as challenges: (i) limited recognition and understanding of BD across stakeholders; (ii) lack of definitions; (iii) poor resourcing and lack of prioritisation in funding models; (iv) absence of validated tools for diagnosis, monitoring treatment response and/or disorder progression; (v) absence of "big data"; (vi) scarcity of evidence-based treatments and clinical guidelines for the early stages of the disorder; (vii) obscurity around optimal service models; (viii) the need for better support and involvement of families and significant others; and (ix) the need for collaboration (across disciplines, stakeholders, and settings) to progress the field. LIMITATIONS: Of those approached, 54.9% participated in the study. Given the qualitative nature of the study, recruiting more experts to the study would not necessarily change the outcomes as data saturation was achieved.
conclusionsThis work lays the foundations for developing a collaborative research framework to progress early intervention for young people with BD.
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.