Talk:Mixed affective state

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Psychiatry Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Psychiatry portal This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Mixed affective state.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

a lively dance?

The description of behavior during a mixed state seems like it may be intended to be humorous, rather than a good faith description.

73.41.82.251 (talk) 04:56, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

This page has been vandalized. Personally, it's frightening that anyone would graffiti such a serious topic.

Medication

Current version of this article states, that a treatment option are "anticonvulsants (aka mood stabilizers)", this is, however, misleading. While, apart lithium all other major mood stabilizers are antiepileptics, this doesn't mean that antiepileptics in general are mood stabilizers; much more AEDs may have some mood stabilising potential, but not every AED is necessarily a mood stabilizer. I will change the formulation to somewhat more convenient.--84.163.108.65 23:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FDA approval for mixed states

The article currently reads that only Abilify is FDA approved to treat mixed states. This not true. Depakote ER, Equetro(carbamazepine), and all the atypical antipsychotics except Seroquel, Clozaril and Invega have approval for acute mixed episodes.

Worst of the worst

If you've ever had to take care of a relation, you'll know that these mixed state zones are the worst. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.173.167 (talk) 21:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Mixed states require medication"

um, that's a very POV statement, wouldn't it seem? Mixed states require medication, period? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.191.11 (talk) 12:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From a clinical perspective, the statement is correct, if a little terse; If someone has been diagnosed with an illness (like Bipolar Disorder) that has mixed-state episodes, then it would be very likely that the doctor who made that diagnosis (or at least some doctor, at some point) will prescribe a mood stabilizer. Of course, everyone reacts differently to medications and it is possible that a patient who is experiencing a mixed state could be better off without any medication for a certain period. I wouldn't think it likely, though.69.11.99.202 (talk) 00:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed action for medicating mixed state or depressive episodes and potentially manic episodes

A mixed state might be best treated with an opiate (i.e. vicodin, percocet, etc.) or a tranquilizer (i.e. xanax, clonazepam) with simultaneous treatment with a mood stabilizer (i.e. lithium or Lamictal) and/or an anti depressant (i.e. prozac, lexapro, zoloft, etc.).

If addiction proposes too much of a problem, an anti-psychotic can be used to calm the patient down. However, many patients will react poorly to anti-psychotic medication. It may cause dystonia, agitation, and and infrequently may be abused.

This is a proposed trajectory of treatment from a sufferer of the disorder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.218.98 (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One sentence

This sentence reads as if it were written by someone who has been in a mixed state, which is good in a way, but somehow it needs to be reworded a bit to sound like an encyclopedia entry:

"One may also feel incredibly frustrated in this state, since one may feel like a failure and at the same time have a flight of ideas."

Maybe it's the word "incredibly", or maybe it's the extremely specific combination of feeling like a failure and having a flight of ideas. John Baez (talk) 06:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is good language that points the reader's mind to something so specific. 75.84.189.218 (talk) 07:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great read

Thank you. It's clear, non-jargony, concise, and was all that I was looking for on the topic. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 09:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Diagnostic criteria

Regarding this paragraph:

The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy (MMDT) splits the DSM-IV diagnosis into two distinct states: dysphoric mania, which consists of a manic episode with depressive symptoms; and agitated depression, which is a "major depressive [episode] with superimposed hypomanic symptoms".[5][dubious – discuss]

The paragraph says it gets its information from the Merck Manual, but I've checked the online Merck Manual and can find nothing in it saying that an agitated depression is a type of mixed state. The paragraph, while referencing the Merck Manual, does not actually cite it, citing instead a study from 2000. I checked the study, but if the Merck Manual is quoted within the study it must be behind the paywall. And if the study does indeed quote the Merck Manual, then the paragraph should reflect that the Merck Manual is quoted within the study. --Beneficii (talk) 23:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 December 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Number 5 7 14:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed state (psychiatry) → Mixed affective state – I believe natural disambiguation is preferred over parenthetical disambiguation. Petr Matas 13:57, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support more meaningful and natural title. Dicklyon (talk) 02:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Competing, unsourced edits regarding agitation vs. retardation in unipolar and bipolar depression

If you look up the talk page at the section "Diagnostic criteria," you will see that there were major issues with the claim that the Merck Manual stated that agitated depression was a type of mixed state. This problem has not been resolved. In addition, we now have new, unsourced additions to the paragraph in question here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mixed_affective_state&oldid=688720676

Then this other editor comes along talking about how the editor before them got it wrong and changes the assertion around, and it is still unsourced:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mixed_affective_state&oldid=704502669

We need to find a reliable secondary medical source for that paragraph per WP:MEDRS because as of now there isn't one. If one is not found, then it should be deleted. --Beneficii (talk) 07:57, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I found this review article, though I don't have access to its full-text:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23881708 --

It looks like the review article is saying that agitation per se doesn't mean agitated depression is a mixed affective state, but that to be a mixed state it "must include symptoms of mania that are related to goal-directed behavior or manic cognition." We can modify the article based on this review, resolving the problem. I would like somebody to get their hands on the full-text. --Beneficii (talk) 08:14, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've gotten a copy of the article, and will be making the update. --Beneficii (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate Description of Attributes of Depression and Mania

The statement, "[A mixed affective state is] defined as a state wherein features unique to both depression and mania such as episodes of despair, doubt, anguish, rage or homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation, splitting, racing thoughts, sensory overload, pressure of activity, and heightened irritability [occur simultaneously]" misrepresents mania and depression. Homicidal ideation and sensory overload are neither diagnostic criteria nor common symptoms of either disorder. The inclusion of "rage" on this list is also questionable. Though manic patients who experience mania as irritation can have rage and women with peripartum depression can experience homicidal ideation, neither of these symptoms is sufficiently prototypic of its disorder that it should be used in this definitional context.

This paragraph also has no citations with it. Perhaps this list should be trimmed to characteristics consistent with the DSM criteria for depression and mania and cited appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkylesmith72 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nkylesmith72 It's called professional syndrome. It's when people try to use smarter sounding words even if it makes it hard to understand or (in this case) unreasonable words, in a professional setting. I see this in everything (I'm not sure if that's a normal thing that adults understand because I'm just an autistic 13 year old that likes learning mental illnesses) and it doesn't seem he will change anything and seems confident in his decision to ruin this page by using unnecessary symptoms. Cyclothymia (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]