A Rating Scale for Mania: Reliability, Validity and Sensitivity

Young, Robert C.; Biggs, John T.; Ziegler, Vincent E.; Meyer, Denny

doi:10.1192/bjp.133.5.429

Cited by 7,450 publications

(4,670 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

4,568

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The duration of the depressive episode was required to be between 4 weeks and 12 months, with a Montgomery‐Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)26 score ≥20 and a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS)27 score ≤12. Patients with psychotic features were excluded; however, rapid cycling (four to seven episodes in the prior year) was permitted.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additional safety evaluations included vital signs, laboratory tests, 12‐lead ECG, and physical examination. Treatment‐emergent mania was defined, a priori, as a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS)27 score of ≥16 at any postbaseline visit, or an adverse event of mania or hypomania. Suicidal ideation and behavior were assessed using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C‐SSRS) 31…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lurasidone in the Long‐term Treatment of Patients With Bipolar Disorder: A 24‐week Open‐label Extension Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of 6 months of open‐label, uncontrolled extension treatment with lurasidone in patients with a diagnosis of bipolar depression who completed 6 weeks of acute treatment.MethodsPatients completing 6 weeks of double‐blind placebo‐controlled treatment with either lurasidone monotherapy (one study) or adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate (two studies), were treated for 6 months with flexible doses of lurasidone, 20–120 mg/day, in an open‐label, uncontrolled extension study (N = 813; monotherapy, 38.9%; adjunctive therapy, 61.1%). Changes in safety parameters were calculated from double‐blind, acute‐phase baseline to month 6 of the extension phase, using a last observation carried forward (LOCF endpoint) analysis.ResultsFive hundred fifty‐nine of 817 (68.4%) patients completed the extension study. In the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy groups, 6.9 and 9.0%, respectively, discontinued due to an adverse event. For the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy groups, respectively, changes from double‐blind baseline to month 6 were +0.8 and +0.9 kg for weight (mean), 0.0 and +2.0 mg/dL for total cholesterol (median), +5.0 and +5.0 mg/dL for triglycerides (median), −1.0 and 0.0 mg/dL for glucose (median); −22.6 and −21.7 for Montgomery‐Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; mean); whereas change from open‐label baseline to month 6 were +0.85 and +0.88 kg for weight (mean), and −6.9 and −6.5 for MADRS (mean).ConclusionsSix months of treatment with open‐label lurasidone was safe and well tolerated with minimal effect on weight and metabolic parameters; continued improvement in depressive symptoms was observed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lurasidone in the Long‐term Treatment of Patients With Bipolar Disorder: A 24‐week Open‐label Extension Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Current depressive symptoms were assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D; Hamilton 1960). Manic symptoms were assessed with the young mania rating scale (YMRS; Young et al, 1978).…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atypical right hemispheric functioning in the euthymic state of bipolar affective disorder

Najt

Hausmann

2014

Psychiatry Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro t purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

show abstract

“…Symptoms were measured with the 24-Item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) (25,26) and the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) (27). Functional impairments caused by illness were assessed with the Global Assessment Scale (GAS) (28).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Life Goals Program and Treatment as Usual for Individuals With Bipolar Disorder

Sajatovic¹,

Davies²,

Ganocy³

et al. 2009

Psychiatric Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This randomized controlled study of 164 outpatients with bipolar disorder in a community mental health center who received standardized psychoeducation (Life Goals Program [LGP]) or treatment as usual sought to determine whether there were differences between the groups in medication adherence attitudes and behaviors. Methods Patients were randomly assigned to treatment as usual (N=80) or treatment as usual plus LGP (N=84) and were assessed at baseline and at the three-, six-, and 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were change in score from baseline on the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI) and on self-reported treatment adherence behaviors (SRTAB). Results At baseline, there were no significant differences between the two groups. Slightly less than half (N=41, 49%) of the LGP group participated in most or all (four to six) LGP sessions, 14% (N=12) participated in one to three sessions, and 37% (N=31) did not participate in any sessions. At the 12-month follow-up there was improvement among all patients, with no significant differences between the two groups, in DAI scores, SRTAB, symptoms, psychopathology, and functional status. Greater depressive severity at baseline was associated with more negative attitudes toward treatment over time, although this finding was not significant (p=.056). Secondary analysis of persons in the LGP group found that compared with those who did not go to any LGP sessions, those with partial or full participation in LGP sessions had improved attitudes toward medication at the three- and six-month follow-up, but no difference was found between the three LGP subgroups by the 12-month follow-up. Conclusions There were no differences between two groups in treatment attitudes at the 12-month follow-up. Low attendance rates mitigated effects on primary outcomes. Effects of LGP may become lost over time without ongoing intervention, and individuals with depression may have reduced response to LGP.

show abstract

A Rating Scale for Mania: Reliability, Validity and Sensitivity

Cited by 7,450 publications

References 11 publications

Lurasidone in the Long‐term Treatment of Patients With Bipolar Disorder: A 24‐week Open‐label Extension Study

Lurasidone in the Long‐term Treatment of Patients With Bipolar Disorder: A 24‐week Open‐label Extension Study

Atypical right hemispheric functioning in the euthymic state of bipolar affective disorder

A Comparison of the Life Goals Program and Treatment as Usual for Individuals With Bipolar Disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About