| Title |
A pilot study differentiating recurrent major depression from bipolar disorder cycling on the depressive pole
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, November 2010
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s14353 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marty Hinz, Alvin Stein, Thomas Uncini |
| Abstract |
A novel method for differentiating and treating bipolar disorder cycling on the depressive pole from patients who are suffering a major depressive episode is explored in this work. To confirm the diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 bipolar disorder, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) criteria require that at least one manic or hypomanic episode be identified. History of one or more manic or hypomanic episodes may be impossible to obtain, representing a potential blind spot in the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. Many bipolar patients who cycle primarily on the depressive side for many years carry a misdiagnosis of recurrent major depression, leading to treatment with antidepressants that achieve little or no relief of symptoms. This article discusses a novel approach for diagnosing and treating patients with bipolar disorder cycling on the depressive pole versus patients with recurrent major depression. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 19% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 48% |
| Psychology | 2 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
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 10 February 2013.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,584
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,306
of 109,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 109,996 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.