Psychosocial care in bipolar disorder and comorbidities: An integrative review

Álaze Gabriel of the Breviary; Alessandra Leite; Marcelo D'Avilla Teixeira Gomes; Williams Ribeiro Mendes; Laureen Giehl

doi:10.15406/mojph.2025.14.00488

MOJ

eISSN: 2379-6383

Public Health

Review Article Special Issue III Schizophrenia vs. Mood Disorders

Psychosocial care in bipolar disorder and comorbidities: An integrative review

Álaze Gabriel of the Breviary, Alessandra Leite, Marcelo D'Avilla Teixeira Gomes, Williams Ribeiro Mendes, Laureen Giehl

Received: June 12, 2025 | Published: July 21, 2025

Citation: Breviary AG, Leite A, Gomes MDAT, et al. Psychosocial care in bipolar disorder and comorbidities: An integrative review. MOJ Public Health. 2025;14(2):186-194. DOI: 10.15406/mojph.2025.14.00488

Download PDF

Abstract

This study investigates the symptom-by-symptom differentiation between Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and giftedness/high abilities, based on an interdisciplinary approach that integrates clinical and organizational psychopathology and legal foundations. The central problem lies in the high rate of mistaken and overlapping diagnoses, which generate significant clinical, social, and legal impacts. The overall objective was to establish theoretical, methodological, and practical parameters that favor more accurate diagnoses, more assertive prognoses, and the technical refutation of inadequate psychiatric reports. The research adopted the Giftedean neoperspectivist paradigm, whose pillars—such as epistemological humility, the continuous search for truth, and the appreciation of diversity—allowed for a more inclusive and critical perspective. The theories of Emotional Dysregulation, Open-Mindedness, Double Exceptionality, and Epistemic Justice were applied. The hypothetical-deductive method guided the formulation of hypotheses and the interpretative analysis. The high-impact narrative scientific review was conducted with methodological rigor, using standardized descriptors in the Medical Hypotheses and Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira databases, resulting in an in-depth analysis of 104 articles. The main findings indicate consistent distinctive criteria among the studied conditions, highlight the risk of false attributions, and propose integrative protocols. The conclusions point to the effectiveness of the adopted approach and the urgency of its clinical and legal application. The main gaps concern the scarcity of validated diagnostic tools for multidisciplinary contexts. Limitations include geographic and documentary restrictions of the data. The research contributes to the advancement of science, professional practice, and diagnostic justice.

Keywords: dual diagnosis, epistemic truth, clinical justice, integrative protocols, expert responsibility