↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Prevalence and clinical features associated with bipolar disorder polypharmacy: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
Title
Prevalence and clinical features associated with bipolar disorder polypharmacy: a systematic review
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, March 2016
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s100846
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele Fornaro, Domenico De Berardis, Ann Sarah Koshy, Giampaolo Perna, Alessandro Valchera, Davy Vancampfort, Brendon Stubbs

Abstract

Uncertainty exists regarding the prevalence and clinical features associated with the practice of polypharmacy in bipolar disorder (BD), warranting a systematic review on the matter. Three authors independently searched major electronic databases from inception till September 2015. Articles were included that reported either qualitative or quantitative data about the prevalence and clinical features associated with polypharmacy in adult cases of BD. The operative definitions of polypharmacy adopted across varying studies varied, with concomitant use of two or more psychotropic medications or use of four or more psychotropic medications at once being the most common and the most reliable, respectively. Regardless of type or current mood episode polarity of BD, prevalence rates up to 85% and 36% were found using the most permissive (two or more medications at once) and the most conservative (four or more) operative definitions for polypharmacy, respectively. Point prevalence prescription rates of one or more antidepressant or antipsychotic as part of a polypharmacy regimen occurred in up to 45% or 80% of the cases, respectively, according to the most permissive definition of polypharmacy. In contrast, lithium prescription rates ranged from 13% to 33% in BD patients receiving polypharmacy according to conservative and permissive definitions, possibly suggesting a reduced need for augmentation of combination strategies for those cases of BD with a favorable lifetime lithium response and/or long-lasting treatment as well as less likelihood of lithium response over the time most severe cases possibly exposed to a more complex polypharmacy overall. "Apples and oranges" bias; publication bias for most recently introduced compounds. Polypharmacy is common among people with BD across varying type and mood episode phases of illness. Special population, including BD patients at high risk of familial load for suicidal behavior, solicit further research as well as the plausible "protective" role of lithium toward polypharmacy in BD. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42014015084.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 29 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 24%
Psychology 12 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Neuroscience 6 6%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 36 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,778,730
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#995
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,417
of 312,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#35
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 312,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 55% of its contemporaries.