Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40212840›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025

Consumers with bipolar disorder presenting to an Australian child and youth mental health service.

Brett McDermott, Raja Sadhu, Mark Mayall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Brett McDermottTasmanian Health Service (THS), Hobart, TAS, Australia.
Raja SadhuChild Adolescent and Young Adult Services, Townsville University Hospital and Health Service, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
Mark MayallChild Adolescent and Young Adult Services, Townsville University Hospital and Health Service and James cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The diagnoses reached for a consecutive set of consumers who presented to a public child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS) in Australia were reviewed to assess the prevalence of bipolar disorder. Other presentations that had an element of mood elevation, specifically a diagnosis of a manic episode and cyclothymia, were also included. Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of consecutive CAMHS consumers between 2014 and 2019. Results: Of 2131 consumers, the average age was 12.6 years and 2.4% of all first-episode diagnoses were either a manic episode, diagnosis of bipolar disorder, or cyclothymia. This represented approximately 20% of all mood disorder diagnoses. This group did not differ from other consumer presentations on gender, but they were approximately two years older at first episode. No consumer who presented when less than 12 years of age had a diagnosis of bipolar disorder or manic episode. The group were significantly lower on a measure of general psychosocial functioning. The cyclothymia/manic episode/bipolar disorder group was more likely to be admitted to a hospital mental health unit and at some time to be under the mental health act. Over the following five-year period, no patient with cyclothymia was diagnosed with a manic episode or bipolar disorder. Discussion: In summary, bipolar disorder is an uncommon diagnosis in children and adolescents attending CAMHS in an Australian regional city. However, these consumers are likely to have more psychosocial impairment and require more restrictive care.

Indexed as

adolescentbipolar disorderchildmental healthservice provision

Identifiers

PMID40212840
PMCPMC11983437

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.