↓ Skip to main content

Testing frameworks for personalizing bipolar disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Translational Psychiatry, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testing frameworks for personalizing bipolar disorder
Published in
Translational Psychiatry, February 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41398-017-0084-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amy L. Cochran, André Schultz, Melvin G. McInnis, Daniel B. Forger

Abstract

The hallmark of bipolar disorder is a clinical course of recurrent manic and depressive symptoms of varying severity and duration. Mathematical modeling of bipolar disorder holds the promise of an ability to personalize diagnoses, to predict future mood episodes, to directly compare diverse datasets, and to link basic mechanisms to behavioral data. Several modeling frameworks have been proposed for bipolar disorder, which represent competing hypothesis about the basic framework of the disorder. Here, we test these hypotheses with self-report assessments of mania and depression symptoms from 178 bipolar patients followed prospectively for 4 or more years. Statistical analysis of the data did not support the hypotheses that mood arises from a rhythmic process or multiple stable states (e.g., mania or depression) or that manic and depressive symptoms are highly anti-correlated. Alternatively, it is shown that bipolar disorder could arise from an inability for mood to quickly return to normal when perturbed. This latter concept is embodied by an affective instability model that can be personalized to the clinical course of any individual with chronic disorders that have an affective component.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 10 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 15%
Psychology 5 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Computer Science 3 7%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Other 9 22%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2023.
All research outputs
#5,114,901
of 25,351,219 outputs
Outputs from Translational Psychiatry
#1,617
of 3,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,497
of 452,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Translational Psychiatry
#30
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,351,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.