Cited by 162Bipolar Disorder and TreatmentMental Health Research TopicsDigital Mental Health Interventions

Daily longitudinal self-monitoring of mood variability in bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder

Open access
Tsanas, A., Saunders, K.E.A., Bilderbeck, A.C., Palmius, N., Osipov, M., Clifford, G.D., Goodwin, G.Μ., De Vos, M.·2016·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, assessment of psychiatric symptoms has been relying on their retrospective report to a trained interviewer. The emergence of smartphones facilitates passive sensor-based monitoring and active real-time monitoring through time-stamped prompts; however there are few validated self-report measures designed for this purpose. METHODS: We introduce a novel, compact questionnaire, Mood Zoom (MZ), embedded in a customised smart-phone application. MZ asks participants to rate anxiety, elation, sadness, anger, irritability and energy on a 7-point Likert scale. For comparison, we used four standard clinical questionnaires administered to participants weekly to quantify mania (ASRM), depression (QIDS), anxiety (GAD-7), and quality of life (EQ-5D). We monitored 48 Bipolar Disorder (BD), 31 Borderline Personality Disorders (BPD) and 51 Healthy control (HC) participants to study longitudinal (median±iqr: 313±194 days) variation and differences of mood traits by exploring the data using diverse time-series tools. RESULTS: MZ correlated well (|R|>0.5,p<0.0001) with QIDS, GAD-7, and EQ-5D. We found statistically strong (|R|>0.3,p<0.0001) differences in variability in all questionnaires for the three cohorts. Compared to HC, BD and BPD participants exhibit different trends and variability, and on average had higher self-reported scores in mania, depression, and anxiety, and lower quality of life. In particular, analysis of MZ variability can differentiate BD and BPD which was not hitherto possible using the weekly questionnaires. LIMITATIONS: All reported scores rely on self-assessment; there is a lack of ongoing clinical assessment by experts to validate the findings. CONCLUSIONS: MZ could be used for efficient, long-term, effective daily monitoring of mood instability in clinical psychiatric practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2016.06.065

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. NICE, 2009. Borderline personality disorder: recognition and management, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE guidelines), retrieved from: 〈 https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg78〉, last accessed: 20 June 2016. 39480982

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tsanas, A., Saunders, K. E. A., Bilderbeck, A. C., Palmius, N., Osipov, M., Clifford, G. D., Goodwin, G. Μ., & De Vos, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Tsanas, A.
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
205
Pages
225-233
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2466601107
Cited by
162
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 1
FWCI
13.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (98,461/Z/12/Z)
  • CONBRIO (102,616/Z)
  • RCUK Digital Economy Programme (EP/G036861/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mood variability, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, mania, depression, anxiety, quality of life, mood instability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Affect, Anger, Anxiety, Bipolar Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, Depression, Female, Humans, Irritable Mood, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Assessment, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review