Potential genes behind the difference between bipolar I and bipolar II disorder

Author(s):  
Miraz Shugol
2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 209-209
Author(s):  
I. Garcia Del Castillo ◽  
L. Fernandez Mayo ◽  
R. Carmona Camacho ◽  
M.J. Martin Calvo ◽  
E. Serrano Drozdowskyj ◽  
...  

IntroductionRecent epidemiological studies suggest that the prevalence of bipolar disorder might be misdiagnosed initially as unipolar depression due to the difficulty to detect episodes of hypomania. The Hypomania Checklist (HCL-32), validated in Spanish, is a self-report questionnaire with 32 hypomania items designed to screen for hypomanic episodes.ObjectivesTo examine the prevalence of hypomania in patients with unipolar depression. Corroborate the efficacy of the HCL-32 to detect symptoms of hypomania.MethodsThe presence of hypomanic symptoms was assessed by the HCL-32 in a sample of 128 subjects diagnosed with bipolar I disorder (n = 30), bipolar II disorder (n = 1), unipolar depression (n = 57), and anxiety disorder (n = 15) according to DSM-IV-TR criteria. A control group of healthy subjects was selected (n = 25).ResultsThe discriminative capacity was analyzed by the ROC curve. The AUC was 0.65 which did not indicate a good capacity. The sensitivity (S), specificity (E) and prevalence (P) of hypomania in unipolar patients for the following cut-off points were :14: S = 81.6%,95%CI(69.8, 93.5); E = 30.1%,95%CI(19.7,40.6); P = 74.1%; 15: S = 77.6%,95%CI(64.9,90.3); E = 37.4%,95%CI(26.3,48.4); P = 67.2%; 16: S = 59.2%,95%CI(44.4,73.9); E = 55.4%,95%CI(44.1,74.0); P = 51.7%; 17: S = 55.1%,95%CI(40.2,70.1); E = 57.8%,95%CI(46.6,69.1); P = 48.3%.ConclusionsThe HCL-32 has a high sensitivity but a low specificity as screening instrument. This might explain the high proportion of hypomania found in this study. The difference with previous studies is that our sample was heterogeneous, unstable and serious. This suggests that the HCL-32 is not valid for any psychiatric sample. Future research should develop more specific instruments with better external validity.


2017 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. S836-S837
Author(s):  
M. Shugol ◽  
D. Popovic ◽  
C. Fabbri ◽  
Y. Stukalin ◽  
M. Mosheva ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 000486742110200
Author(s):  
Gordon Parker

The 2020 College guidelines for mood disorders banish bipolar II disorder – despite its formal status in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and International Classification of Diseases manuals for more than two decades – and argue that there is no need to partition bipolar disorder into separate sub-types. Their single-entity model is seemingly based on opinion rather than any support from referenced scientific studies. The author challenges the Committee’s model of there being only one bipolar disorder and argues that it presents several clinical management risks, particularly of ‘over-treatment’.


2000 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 339-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduard Vieta ◽  
Francesc Colom ◽  
Anabel Martı́nez-Arán ◽  
Antonio Benabarre ◽  
Maria Reinares ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 83 (9) ◽  
pp. S180-S181
Author(s):  
Delfina Janiri ◽  
Pietro De Rossi ◽  
Alessio Simonetti ◽  
Georgios D. Kotzalidis ◽  
Gianfranco Spalletta ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUANA D. LAURITO ◽  
LEONARDO F. FONTENELLE ◽  
DAVID A. KAHN

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document