Despite the robust body of work on cognitive aspects of bipolar disorder (BD), a clear profile of associated impairments in impulsivity, decision-making and risk-taking from studies that use behavioural measures has yet to be established. A systematic review, across four electronic databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE/PubMed, ScienceDirect and Scopus), of literature published between January 1999 and December 2018 was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA statement. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018114684). A fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis using the Hedges' g (ES) estimate was performed. The analysis revealed significant impairment in BD individuals with medium effect sizes in various aspects of impulsivity – response inhibition (ES = 0.49; p < 0.0001), delay of gratification (ES = 0.54; p < 0.0001) and inattention (ES = 0.49; p < 0.0001) – and in decision-making (ES = 0.61, p = 0.0002), but no significant impairment in risk-taking behaviour (ES = 0.41; p = 0.0598). Furthermore, we found significant heterogeneity between studies for decision-making and risk-taking behaviour but not for impulsivity. Impaired risk-taking behaviour was significant in a subgroup of BD-I and euthymic individuals (ES = 0.92; p < 0.0001) with no significant heterogeneity. A stratification analysis revealed comparable results in euthymic and non-euthymic individuals for impulsivity. Our findings suggest that behaviour impulsivity is elevated in all phases of BD, representing a core and clinically relevant feature that persists beyond mood symptoms. More studies about decision-making and risk-taking are necessary to establish if they are impaired in BD and to analyze the role of mood state.

Background The aim of this systematic review was to examine the classification of calls for suicidal behavior in emergency medical services (EMS). Methods A search strategy was carried out in four electronic databases on calls for suicidal behavior in EMS published between 2010 and 2020 in Spanish and English. The outcome variables analyzed were the moment of call classification, the professional assigning the classification, the type of classification, and the suicide codes. Results Twenty-five studies were included in the systematic review. The EMS classified the calls at two moments during the service process. In 28% of the studies, classification was performed during the emergency telephone call and in 36% when the professional attended the patient at the scene. The calls were classified by physicians in 40% of the studies and by the telephone operator answering the call in 32% of the studies. In 52% of the studies, classifications were used to categorize the calls, while in 48%, this information was not provided. Eighteen studies (72%) described codes used to classify suicidal behavior calls: a) codes for suicidal behavior and self-injury, and b) codes related to intoxication, poisoning or drug abuse, psychiatric problems, or other methods of harm. Conclusion Despite the existence of international disease classifications and standardized suicide identification systems and codes in EMS, there is no consensus on their use, making it difficult to correctly identify calls for suicidal behavior.

Introduction. Suicide attempts are the most predictive risk factor for suicide deaths. Most people who attempt suicide receive care from out-of-hospital Emergency Services (OES), where these requests are managed and classified. Objective. Validate the Emergency Coordination Center (ECC) classification for the detection of suicidal behavior requests. Method. A descriptive, cross-sectional study of requests to the ECC of Málaga (Spain) during 2013 and 2014 was conducted. To classify the requests, the authors considered the ECC categorization when answering the call and the clinical assessment of the healthcare professional when attending the person who had made the call at the scene, which was considered the reference standard. To analyze the validity of the ECC classification system, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated. Results. The total number of requests for medical assistance analyzed was 112,599. The validity indicators of the classification system for suicidal behavior were sensitivity = 44.78%, specificity = 99.34%, PPV = 46.91% and NPV = 99.28%. Discussion and conclusion. The ECC classification system has a lower capacity to detect the presence of suicidal behavior and a higher capacity to identify its absence in the requests received. OES provide key information on suicidal behavior requests as they can be one of the first places people with this problem go to. It would therefore be extremely useful to improve the classification systems for requests related to suicidal behavior.