of the GAF score as a covariate, we compared subjects who met criteria for current mania or depression with those that were euthymic based on the DIGS interview (see Figure S1 and Table S3). Euthymic subjects comprised 79% of the sample and revealed significant differences in GAF scores and all TEMPS-A subscales, except hyperthymic, when compared to depressed subjects. No other group comparisons were significant, suggesting that state effects are relatively minor in this sample. We have also covaried for AAO as a proxy for illness severity, since subjects with a more severe course of illness may respond differently than subjects with a milder course, regardless of whether they are currently symptomatic. Though AAO may be difficult to determine historically, we observed correlations with a number of measures of illness severity, thereby supporting the accuracy of the measurement and its validity as a proxy for illness severity. Finally, when GAF and AAO are included in the analysis described above, no group differences remain significant, suggesting that the combination of GAF and AAO provides a reasonable correction for any state-related differences in TEMPS-A subscales.
