Therapeutic Mechanism in Seasonal Affective Disorder: Do Fluoxetine and Light Operate Through Advancing Circadian Phase?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of Lewy's phase delay hypothesis, the present study tested whether effective treatment of winter Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) is mediated by advancing of circadian phase. Following a baseline week, 78 outpatients with SAD were randomized into 8 weeks of treatment with either fluoxetine and placebo light treatment or light treatment and placebo pill. Depression levels were measured on the Ham17+7 and the BDI-II, and circadian phase was estimated on the basis of daily sleep logs and self-reported morningness-eveningness. Among the 61 outpatients with complete data, both treatments were associated with significant antidepressant effect and phase advance. However, pre- and post-treatment comparisons found that the degree of symptom change did not correlate with the degree of phase change associated with treatment. The study therefore provides no evidence that circadian phase advance mediates the therapeutic mechanism in patients with SAD. Findings are discussed in terms of the limitations of the circadian measures employed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".