Refined diagnostic criteria for the bipolar disorders: phase two of the AREDOC project.

Objective: As limitations exist across DSM criteria sets for defining and differentiating the bipolar disorders generally and their component bipolar I (BP‐1) and bipolar II (BP‐II) sub‐types, we sought to generate empirically based criteria. Method: We formed an international Task Force (TF) comprising members with bipolar disorder expertise, and who recruited 74 patients with a TF‐diagnosed bipolar I and 104 with a bipolar II condition (with patients responding to definitional queries and symptom questionnaires), while 33 unipolar depressed patients recruited by the first author also completed the symptom questionnaire. A factor analysis sought to determine granular hypo/manic constructs. Results: The bipolar disorder subjects strongly affirmed a new general definition of a bipolar disorder (capturing both manic and hypomanic episodes). While DSM‐5 requires impaired functioning, we established that a high percentage of individuals with a BP‐I or a BP‐II disorder reported improved functioning and therefore modified this criterion. Analyses identified syptoms with differential high rates in individuals with bipolar disorder and its sub‐types (and thus not simply capturing happiness), while a factor analysis generated seven symptom constructs both linked with and differing from DSM‐5 bipolar symptom criteria. Conclusion: This second‐stage report details a new set of criteria for differentiating the bipolar disorders from unipolar depressive conditions, while arguing for BP‐I and BP‐II disorders being differentiated principally by the respective presence or absence of psychotic features. Future studies will evaluate whether further modifications are required and examine for differential treatment benefits for those with a BP‐I versus a BP‐II condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]