Clinical Focus

  • Psychiatry

Academic Appointments

  • Clinical Assistant Professor, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences

Professional Education

  • Residency:Stanford University School of Medicine (2009) CA
  • Medical Education:Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons (2005) NY
  • Board Certification: Psychiatry, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (2010)


Journal Articles

  • Bipolar therapeutics update 2014: a tale of 3 treatments. journal of clinical psychiatry Ketter, T. A., Wang, P. W., Miller, S. 2015; 76 (1): 69-70


    In the 2010s, advances in the treatment of bipolar disorder slowed, with only 1 agent approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for acute bipolar I depression (in 2013), compared to the robust progress in the 2000s, during which 7 agents were approved for acute mania, 2 for acute bipolar depression, and 6 for bipolar disorder preventive treatment. This slowing of progress may have been in part due to decreased pharmaceutical company enthusiasm for developing compounds for psychiatric indications, as well as the tendency for periods of consolidation (development of derivative and better-tolerated treatments) to follow periods of rapid advances (development of efficacious novel treatments) in pharmacotherapy advancement.

    View details for DOI 10.4088/JCP.14ac09649

    View details for PubMedID 25650673

  • Balancing benefits and harms of treatments for acute bipolar depression. Journal of affective disorders Ketter, T. A., Miller, S., Dell'Osso, B., Calabrese, J. R., Frye, M. A., Citrome, L. 2014; 169: S24-33


    Bipolar depression is more pervasive than mania, but has fewer evidence-based treatments.Using data from multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and meta-analyses, we assessed the number needed to treat (NNT) for response and the number needed to harm (NNH) for selected side effects for older and newer acute bipolar depression treatments.The 2 older FDA-approved treatments for bipolar depression, olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC) and quetiapine (QTP) monotherapy, were efficacious (response NNT=4 for OFC, NNT=6 for QTP), but similarly likely to yield harms (OFC weight gain NNH=6; QTP sedation/somnolence NNH=5). Commonly used unapproved agents (lamotrigine monotherapy and adjunctive antidepressants) tended to be well-tolerated (with double-digit NNHs), although this advantage was at the cost of inadequate efficacy (response NNT=12 for lamotrigine, NNT=29 for antidepressants). In contrast, the newly approved agent lurasidone was not only efficacious (response NNT=5 for monotherapy, NNT=7 as adjunctive therapy), but also had enhanced tolerability (NNH=15 for akathisia [monotherapy], NNH=16 for nausea [adjunctive]). Although adjunctive armodafinil appeared well tolerated, its efficacy in bipolar depression has not been consistently demonstrated in randomized controlled trials.NNT and NNH are categorical metrics; only selected NNHs were assessed; limited generalizability of efficacy (versus effectiveness) studies.For acute bipolar depression, older approved treatments may have utility in high-urgency situations, whereas lamotrigine and antidepressants may have utility in low-urgency situations. Newly approved lurasidone may ultimately prove useful in diverse situations. New drug development needs to focus on not only efficacy but also on tolerability.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/S0165-0327(14)70006-0

    View details for PubMedID 25533911

  • The prevalence and burden of bipolar depression. Journal of affective disorders Miller, S., Dell'Osso, B., Ketter, T. A. 2014; 169: S3-11


    Bipolar disorder is characterized by debilitating episodes of depression and mood elevation (mania or hypomania). For most patients, depressive symptoms are more pervasive than mood elevation or mixed symptoms, and thus have been reported in individual studies to impose a greater burden on affected individuals, caregivers, and society. This article reviews and compiles the literature on the prevalence and burden of syndromal as well as subsyndromal presentations of depression in bipolar disorder patients.The PubMed database was searched for English-language articles using the search terms "bipolar disorder," "bipolar depression," "burden," "caregiver burden," "cost," "costs," "economic," "epidemiology," "prevalence," "quality of life," and "suicide." Search results were manually reviewed, and relevant studies were selected for inclusion as appropriate. Additional references were obtained manually from reviewing the reference lists of selected articles found by computerized search.In aggregate, the findings support the predominance of depressive symptoms compared with mood elevation/mixed symptoms in the course of bipolar illness, and thus an overall greater burden in terms of economic costs, functioning, caregiver burden, and suicide.This review, although comprehensive, provides a study-wise aggregate (rather than a patient-wise meta-analytic) summary of the relevant literature on this topic.In light of its pervasiveness and prevalence, more effective and aggressive treatments for bipolar depression are warranted to mitigate its profound impact upon individuals and society. Such studies could benefit by including metrics not only for mood outcomes, but also for illness burden.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/S0165-0327(14)70003-5

    View details for PubMedID 25533912

  • Trends in pharmacotherapy in patients referred to a bipolar specialty clinic, 2000-2011 JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS Hooshmand, F., Miller, S., Dore, J., Wang, P. W., Hill, S. J., Portillo, N., Ketter, T. A. 2014; 155: 283-287


    To assess mood stabilizer (MS) and second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) prescribing trends in bipolar disorder (BD) outpatients referred to a bipolar disorder specialty clinic over the past 12 years.BD outpatients referred to the Stanford University Bipolar Disorder Clinic during 2000-2011 were assessed with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for BD (STEP-BD) Affective Disorders Evaluation. Prescription rates for MSs and SGAs were compared during the first (2000-2005) and second (2006-2011) six years.Among 597 BD patients (mean±SD age 35.4±8.6 years; 58.1% female; 40.7% Type I, 43.6% Type II, and 15.7% Type Not Otherwise Specified; taking 2.6±1.7 prescription psychotropic medications), lamotrigine, quetiapine, and aripiprazole usage more than doubled, from 14.7% to 37.2% (p<0.0001), 7.2% to 19.7% (p<0.0001), and 3.1% to 10.9% (p=0.0003), respectively, while olanzapine and risperidone use decreased by more than half from 15.0% to 6.6% (p=0.0043), and from 8.7% to 3.8% (p=0.039), respectively. SGA use increased from 34.1% to 44.8% (p=0.013), although MS use continued to be more common (in 65.2% for 2006-2011). Use of other individual MSs and SGAs and MSs as a class did not change significantly.Over 12 years, in patients referred to a BD specialty clinic, lamotrigine, quetiapine, and aripiprazole use more than doubled, and olanzapine and risperidone use decreased by more than half. Tolerability (for lamotrigine, aripiprazole, olanzapine, and risperidone) more than efficacy (for quetiapine) differences may have driven these findings. Additional studies are needed to explore the relative influences of enhanced tolerability versus efficacy upon prescribing practices in BD patients.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2013.10.054

    View details for Web of Science ID 000329574500041

    View details for PubMedID 24314912

  • Superior chronic tolerability of adjunctive modafinil compared to pramipexole in treatment-resistant bipolar disorder JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS Dell'Osso, B., Timtim, S., Hooshmand, F., Miller, S., Wang, P. W., Hill, S. J., Portillo, N., Ketter, T. A. 2013; 150 (1): 130-135


    Suboptimal outcomes are common in bipolar disorder (BD) pharmacotherapy, and may be mitigated with novel adjunctive agents such as modafinil (a low-affinity dopamine transport inhibitor) and pramipexole (a dopamine D2/D3 receptor agonist). While uncontrolled long-term effectiveness data have been reported for these treatments, reports specifically assessing their comparative acute versus chronic tolerability in BD are lacking. Such information, particularly in relation to discontinuation causes, has substantial relevance, providing initial indications to clinicians which treatment may be better tolerated, and to researchers which agent ought to be assessed in longer-term controlled trials.BD outpatients assessed with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) Affective Disorders Evaluation, and followed with the STEP-BD Clinical Monitoring Form, were naturalistically prescribed adjunctive modafinil or pramipexole, and somatic/psychiatric intolerability discontinuation rates were compared.Among 63 BD outpatients (mean±SD age 43.5±14.3 years, 60.3% female, 42.9% type I, 44.4% type II, 12.7% type not otherwise specified), taking 3.5±1.5 (median 3) concurrent prescription psychotropics, adjunctive modafinil (n=24) for 626.9±863.9 (286) days versus pramipexole (n=39) for 473.7±613.4 (214; p=0.51) days yielded a 26.0% lower somatic/psychiatric intolerability discontinuation rate (12.5% vs. 38.5%; p<0.05), with most of the difference accounted for by more pramipexole somatic intolerability discontinuations, due to nausea and sedation, after the first 12 weeks of treatment.No placebo comparison group. Small sample of predominantly female Caucasian insured outpatients, taking complex concurrent medication regimens.Further studies are warranted to assess our preliminary observation that modafinil, compared to pramipexole, may be better tolerated for longer-term BD treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2012.11.030

    View details for Web of Science ID 000322762600019

    View details for PubMedID 23261131

  • Long-term aripiprazole effectiveness in bipolar disorder patients decreases with pharmacotherapeutic complexity and degree of baseline mood disturbance ASIAN BIOMEDICINE Ittasakul, P., Miller, S., Wang, P. W., Hill, S. J., Childers, M. E., Ketter, T. A. 2013; 7 (4): 537-544
  • Bipolar disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder comorbidity in children and adolescents: evidence-based approach to diagnosis and treatment. journal of clinical psychiatry Miller, S., Chang, K. D., Ketter, T. A. 2013; 74 (6): 628-629

    View details for DOI 10.4088/JCP.13ac08565

    View details for PubMedID 23842014

  • Brain-derived neurotrophic factor val66met genotype and early life stress effects upon bipolar course JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH Miller, S., Hallmayer, J., Wang, P. W., Hill, S. J., Johnson, S. L., Ketter, T. A. 2013; 47 (2): 252-258


    Gene-environment interactions may contribute to bipolar disorder (BD) clinical course variability. We examined effects of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) val66met genotype and early life stress (ELS) upon illness severity and chronicity in adult BD patients.80 patients (43 BD I, 33 BD II, 4 BD not otherwise specified, mean ± SD age 46.4 ± 14.0 years, 63.7% female) receiving open evidence-based and measurement-based care in the Stanford Bipolar Disorders Clinic for at least 12 months underwent BDNF val66met genotyping and completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. BDNF met allele carrier genotype and history of childhood sexual and physical abuse were evaluated in relation to mean prior-year Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Version-Overall Severity of Illness (MPY-CGI-BP-OS) score and clinical and demographic characteristics.BDNF met allele carriers (but not non-met allele carriers) with compared to without childhood sexual abuse had 21% higher MPY-CGI-BP-OS scores (3.5 ± 0.7 versus 2.9 ± 0.7, respectively, t = -2.4, df = 28, p = 0.025) and 35% earlier BD onset age (14.6 ± 5.7 versus 22.8 ± 7.9 years, respectively, t = 3.0, df = 27, p = 0.006). Regression analysis, however, was non-significant for a BDNF-childhood sexual abuse interaction.small sample of predominantly female Caucasian insured outpatients taking complex medication regimens; only one gene polymorphism considered.Between group comparisons suggested BDNF met allele carrier genotype might amplify negative effects of ELS upon BD illness severity/chronicity, although with regression analysis, there was not a significant gene-environment interaction. Further studies with larger samples are warranted to assess whether BDNF met allele carriers with ELS are at risk for more severe/chronic BD illness course.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2012.10.015

    View details for Web of Science ID 000314330100016

  • Enhanced Ziprasidone Combination Therapy Effectiveness in Obese Compared to Nonobese Patients With Bipolar Disorder JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY Miller, S., Ittasakul, P., Wang, P. W., Hill, S. J., Childers, M. E., Rasgon, N., Ketter, T. A. 2012; 32 (6): 814-819


    To assess longer-term ziprasidone effectiveness in obese and non-obese patients with bipolar disorder (BD).Outpatients assessed with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for BD Affective Disorders Evaluation and monitored with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for BD Clinical Monitoring Form received open ziprasidone.Eighty-two patients (39 patients with BD I, 39 patients with BD II, and 4 patients with BD not otherwise specified; mean age, 41.1 years; females, 78.0%; obese, 48.8%) received ziprasidone combined with an average of 3.6 (in 74.4% at least 3) other prescription psychotropics and 1.2 prescription nonpsychotropics. Mean (median) ziprasidone final dose and duration were 134.3 (150) mg/d and 489 (199.5) days, respectively. Ziprasidone yielded in obese compared to nonobese patients less discontinuation (42.5% vs 71.4%, P = 0.01), albeit with a higher rate of addition of subsequent psychotropic medication (62.5% vs 35.7%, P = 0.03). Moreover, obese compared to nonobese patients had a higher rate of shift to final-visit euthymia (27.5% vs 0.0%, P = 0.0002), and more weight loss (-20.7 lbs vs -0.6 lbs, P = 0.001), and obese (but not nonobese) patients had significant improvements in mean Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (decreased 0.6 points; P = 0.03) and Global Assessment of Functioning (increased 3.3 points, P = 0.01) scores. Weight change correlated significantly with Global Assessment of Functioning change (P = 0.047) but not with Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness change. Limitations are small sample size and open-label, uncontrolled, observational design.Controlled and additional observational studies seem warranted to confirm our preliminary findings suggesting ziprasidone may be more effective in obese compared to nonobese patients with BD already receiving combination pharmacotherapy.

    View details for DOI 10.1097/JCP.0b013e318270dea9

    View details for Web of Science ID 000310923500014

    View details for PubMedID 23131875

  • Pilot study of the efficacy of double-blind, placebo-controlled one-week olanzapine stabilization therapy in heterogeneous symptomatic bipolar disorder patients JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH Srivastava, S., Wang, P. W., Hill, S. J., Childers, M. E., Keller, K. L., Ketter, T. A. 2012; 46 (7): 920-926


    Olanzapine has demonstrated efficacy in acute mania and bipolar I disorder (BDI) maintenance, but efficacy in brief therapy in more diverse populations, including patients with bipolar II disorder (BDII)/bipolar disorder not otherwise specified (BDNOS) with syndromal/subsyndromal depressive/mood elevation symptoms and taking/not taking concurrent medications remains to be established.Fifty adult outpatients (24 BD1, 22 BDII, 4 BDNOS, mean ± SD age 40.8 ± 11.5 years, 28.1% female, already taking 1.1 ± 1.2 [median 1] prescription psychotropics) with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) ?10 and/or Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) ?10 and ?24, were randomized to double-blind olanzapine (2.5-20 mg/day) versus placebo for one week.Among 45 patients with post-baseline ratings, olanzapine (9.0 ± 5.8 mg/day, n = 23) compared to placebo (n = 22) tended to yield greater Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Version-Overall Severity of Illness (-1.4 ± 0.9 versus -0.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.08) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale (-7.9 ± 6.3 versus -3.8 ± 6.1, p = 0.07) improvements, and YMRS/HDRS remission rate (47.8% versus 22.7%, p = 0.08), but significantly increased median weight (+2 versus -1 lbs, p = 0.001), and rates of excessive appetite (54.2% versus 22.7%, p = 0.04) and tremor (50.0% versus 9.1% p = 0.004). Number Needed to Treat and 95% Confidence Interval for YMRS/HDRS remission were 4 (1-?). Numbers Needed to Harm for excessive appetite and tremor were 4 (1-21) and 3 (1-6), respectively.Olanzapine tended to yield affective improvement and significantly increased weight, appetite, and tremor. Larger controlled studies appear feasible and warranted to assess brief olanzapine therapy in heterogeneous symptomatic bipolar disorder patients.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2012.04.004

    View details for Web of Science ID 000306536100012

    View details for PubMedID 22579071

  • Effectiveness of quetiapine plus lamotrigine maintenance therapy in challenging bipolar disorder patients JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS Ittasakul, P., Johnson, K. R., Srivastava, S., Childers, M. E., Brooks, J. O., Hoblyn, J. C., Ketter, T. A. 2012; 137 (1-3): 139-145


    Assess quetiapine plus lamotrigine (QTP+LTG) combination maintenance therapy effectiveness in challenging bipolar disorder (BD).Outpatients assessed with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) Affective Disorders Evaluation and followed with the STEP-BD Clinical Monitoring Form were naturalistically prescribed QTP+LTG.Fifty-four outpatients with challenging BD, taking in addition to QTP+LTG, a mean±SD of 2.1±1.6 (in 63.0% at least 2) other psychotropic and 2.3±1.9 non-psychotropic prescription medications, had QTP+LTG maintenance trials. Median(mean±SD) QTP+LTG duration was 401(730±756) days. Final QTP and LTG doses were 87.5(188±211) and 300(287±108) mg/day, respectively. Half (27/54) of patients discontinued QTP (in 19), LTG (in 6), or QTP+LTG (in 2), after 294(415±414) days - due to side-effects in 10, inefficacy in seven, non-adherence in five, and other reasons in five. 42.6%(23/54) had additional pharmacotherapy intervention for emergent mood symptoms, after 175(261±237) days, with at least one psychotropic added (in 16/54) or substantively (by ?50%) increased (in 7/54). 55.6%(30/54) had recurrent mood episodes, after 126(187±158) days, most often depressive (in 35.2%), although 64.8%(35/54) were euthymic at final visit taking QTP+LTG. Sedation increased significantly during treatment among those with side-effect discontinuations, and 19.2%(10/52, all having QTP added to LTG) had clinically significant (?7%) weight gain.No placebo comparison group. Small sample of predominantly female Caucasian insured outpatients taking complex concurrent medication regimens.Additional studies are warranted to confirm our preliminary observation that QTP+LTG maintenance may be effective in patients with challenging BD.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2011.12.024

    View details for Web of Science ID 000301759900018

    View details for PubMedID 22240084

  • Clinical Relevance of Treatments for Acute Bipolar Disorder: Balancing Therapeutic and Adverse Effects CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS Srivastava, S., Ketter, T. A. 2011; 33 (12): B40-B48


    The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved 10 treatments for acute mania, but only 2 for acute bipolar depression. These agents differ from one another with respect to their efficacy and tolerability profiles, such that certain medications may be optimal for some patients but not others.Our aim was to compare the therapeutic and adverse effects of treatments for acute mania and acute bipolar depression to inform clinical decision making.Using data from large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled acute mania and acute bipolar depression trials, we assessed number needed to treat (NNT) for response, number needed to harm (NNH) for sedation/weight gain, and likelihood to help or harm (LHH = NNH ÷ NNT) compared with placebo.For acute mania, lithium compared with other FDA-approved agents yielded substantively less sedation (NNH, 27 vs 5-17) yet broadly similar efficacy (NNT, 4 vs 4-8), and thus a more favorable efficacy:sedation likelihood (LHH, 6.8 vs 0.7-3.4). For acute bipolar depression, lamotrigine compared with FDA-approved treatments yielded substantively less sedation (NNH, 42 vs 6-12), weight gain (NNH, -34 vs 6-19), and efficacy (NNT, 12 vs 4-6), but still more favorable efficacy:sedation likelihood (LHH, 3.5) than quetiapine (LHH, 1.0) and efficacy:weight gain likelihood (LHH, -2.8) than the olanzapine plus fluoxetine combination (LHH, 1.5).For acute mania, lithium compared with other FDA-approved agents yielded less sedation yet similar efficacy, indicating utility for patients sensitive to sedation. For acute bipolar depression, lamotrigine compared with FDA-approved treatments yielded better tolerability but poorer efficacy, suggesting utility in patients sensitive to sedation/weight gain with milder episodes, whereas the FDA-approved treatments might have utility in patients with more severe episodes.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.clinthera.2011.11.020

    View details for Web of Science ID 000298831400034

    View details for PubMedID 22177379

  • Treatments for bipolar disorder: can number needed to treat/harm help inform clinical decisions? ACTA PSYCHIATRICA SCANDINAVICA Ketter, T. A., Citrome, L., Wang, P. W., Culver, J. L., Srivastava, S. 2011; 123 (3): 175-189


    To compare bipolar treatment interventions, using number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH).Results of randomized controlled clinical trials were used to assess efficacy (NNT for response and relapse/recurrence prevention vs. placebo) and tolerability (e.g. NNH for weight gain and sedation vs. placebo).United States Food and Drug Administration-approved bipolar disorder pharmacotherapies all have single-digit NNTs (i.e. > 10% advantage over placebo), but NNHs for adverse effects that vary widely. Some highly efficacious agents are as likely to yield adverse effects as therapeutic benefit, but may be interventions of choice in more acute severe illness. In contrast, some less efficacious agents with better tolerability may be interventions of choice in more chronic mild-moderate illness.Clinical trials can help inform clinical decision making by quantifying the likelihood of benefit vs. harm. Integrating such data with individual patient circumstances, values, and preferences can help optimize treatment choices.

    View details for DOI 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2010.01645.x

    View details for Web of Science ID 000286890300002

    View details for PubMedID 21133854

  • The Link Between Bipolar Disorders and Creativity: Evidence from Personality and Temperament Studies CURRENT PSYCHIATRY REPORTS Srivastava, S., Ketter, T. A. 2010; 12 (6): 522-530


    Although extensive literature supports connections between bipolar disorder and creativity, possible mechanisms underlying such relationships are only beginning to emerge. Herein we review evidence supporting one such possible mechanism, namely that personality/temperament contribute to enhanced creativity in individuals with bipolar disorder, a theory supported by studies showing that certain personality/temperamental traits are not only common to bipolar disorder patients and creative individuals but also correlate with measures of creativity. Thus, we suggest based on studies using three important personality/temperament measures-the Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness Personality Inventory (NEO); the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI); and the Temperament Evaluation of the Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A)-that changeable (increased TEMPS-A-cyclothymia) and at times negative (increased NEO-neuroticism) affect and open-minded (increased NEO-openness) and intuitive (increased MBTI-intuition) cognition may contribute importantly to enhanced creativity in individuals with bipolar disorder.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s11920-010-0159-x

    View details for Web of Science ID 000289733500006

    View details for PubMedID 20936438

  • Toward interaction of affective and cognitive contributors to creativity in bipolar disorders: A controlled study JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS Srivastava, S., Childers, M. E., Baek, J. H., Strong, C. M., Hill, S. J., Warsett, K. S., Wang, P. W., Akiskal, H. S., Akiskal, K. K., Ketter, T. A. 2010; 125 (1-3): 27-34


    Enhanced creativity in bipolar disorder patients may be related to affective and cognitive phenomena.32 bipolar disorder patients (BP), 21 unipolar major depressive disorder patients (MDD), 22 creative controls (CC), and 42 healthy controls (HC) (all euthymic) completed the Revised Neuroticism Extraversion Openness Personality Inventory (NEO), the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A), the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI); the Barron-Welsh Art Scale (BWAS), the Adjective Check List Creative Personality Scale, and the Figural and Verbal Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Mean scores were compared across groups, and relationships between temperament/personality and creativity were assessed with bivariate correlation and hierarchical multiple linear regression.BP and CC (but not MDD) compared to HC had higher BWAS-Total (46% and 42% higher, respectively, p<0.05) and BWAS-Dislike (83% and 93% higher, p<0.02) scores, and higher MBTI-Intuition preference type rates (78% vs. 50% and 96% vs. 50%, p<0.05). BP, MDD, and CC, compared to HC, had increased TEMPS-A-Cyclothymia scores (666%, 451% and 434% higher, respectively, p<0.0001), and NEO-Neuroticism scores (60%, 57% and 51% higher, p<0.0001). NEO-Neuroticism and TEMPS-A Cyclothymia correlated with BWAS-Dislike (and BWAS-Total), while MBTI-Intuition continuous scores and NEO-Openness correlated with BWAS-Like (and BWAS-Total).Relatively small sample size.We replicate the role of cyclothymic and related temperaments in creativity, as well as that of intuitive processes. Further studies are needed to clarify relationships between creativity and affective and cognitive processes in bipolar disorder patients.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2009.12.018

    View details for Web of Science ID 000281377100004

    View details for PubMedID 20085848

Footer Links:

Stanford Medicine Resources: