Complementary, Holistic, and Integrative Medicine: St. John's Wort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Theresa L. Charrois, BScPharm, MSc* 2. Candace Sadler* 3. Sunita Vohra, MD, MSc* 1. *Complementary and Alternative Research and Education (CARE) Program, Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Canada, on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics Provisional Section on Complementary, Holistic, and Integrative Medicine St. John’s wort, derived from the Hypericaceae family, has played a medicinal role for thousands of years. (1) Although it has been used empirically for a wide range of ailments in the past, including skin conditions, nerve problems, and muscle pain, the primary uses currently are for depression and nervous conditions, (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7) due to its ability to inhibit the reuptake of dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine within the brain. (2) Although promising evidence is emerging for the clinical use of St. John’s wort, data specific to pediatrics are still limited, warranting additional research. Surveys in the United States and Britain of herbal use for the treatment of pediatric depression (8)(9) demonstrate that St. John’s wort is used commonly by children (22% and 9% in the two surveys, respectively). Formal evaluation of efficacy in pediatric populations is preliminary but shows some promise. Presently, no systematic reviews or randomized, controlled trials have been published regarding the use of St. John’s wort in children. An open-label pilot study conducted by Findling and associates (10) analyzed the use of St. John’s wort in children between the ages of 6 and 16 years for treatment of major depressive disorder. The starting dose was 150 mg 3 times daily for 4 weeks. Exclusion criteria included failure to respond to 4 weeks of antidepressant therapy. Patients considered clinically nonresponsive to St. John’s wort (as per a priori criteria) after 4 weeks had their dosage increased to 300 mg 3 times daily. A total of 33 patients were enrolled in the study, with a mean age of 10.5 years (SD, 2.9 y). At the end of the 8-week trial, 25 patients met the criteria of clinical response (76%). Also, 93% of the study population decided to …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".