↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacological treatment and staging in bipolar disorder: evidence from clinical practice.

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Pharmacological treatment and staging in bipolar disorder: evidence from clinical practice.
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, May 2015
DOI 10.1590/1516-4446-2014-1554
Pubmed ID
Authors

Goi, Pedro D, Bücker, Joana, Vianna-Sulzbach, Mireia, Rosa, Adriane R, Grande, Iria, Chendo, Ines, Sodré, Leonardo A, Kauer-Sant'Anna, Marcia, Silveira, Leonardo, Kunz, Mauricio, Ceresér, Keila M, Gama, Clarissa S, Massuda, Raffael

Abstract

Staging models for medical diseases are widely used to guide treatment and prognosis. Bipolar disorder (BD) is a chronic condition and it is among the most disabling disorders in medicine. The staging model proposed by Kapczinski in 2009 presents four progressive clinical stages of BD. Our aim was to evaluate pharmacological maintenance treatment across these stages in patients with BD. One hundred and twenty-nine subjects who met DSM-IV criteria for BD were recruited from the Bipolar Disorders Program at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil. All patients were in remission. The subjects were classified according to the staging model: 31 subjects were classified as stage I, 44 as stage II, 31 as stage III, and 23 as stage IV. Patterns of pharmacological treatment differed among the four stages (p = 0.001). Monotherapy was more frequent in stage I, and two-drug combinations in stage II. Patients at stages III and IV needed three or more medications or clozapine. Impairment in functional status (Functioning Assessment Short Test [FAST] scale scores) correlated positively with the number of medications prescribed. This study demonstrated differences in pharmacological treatment in patients with stable BD depending on disease stage. Treatment response can change with progression of BD. Clinical guidelines could consider the staging model to guide treatment effectiveness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 36%
Psychology 14 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 21 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 January 2016.
All research outputs
#5,277,874
of 7,047,715 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria
#31
of 58 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,121
of 318,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,047,715 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 58 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 318,270 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.