An Open-Label Trial of St. John's Wort (Hypericum perforatum) in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent interest in and evidence for the efficacy of St. John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) for the treatment of mild-to-moderate depression has led to speculation about its efficacy in other disorders. Hypericum's mechanism of action is postulated to be via inhibition of the synaptosomal uptake of serotonin. As such, there is a suggestion that Hypericum may be effective for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). METHOD: Twelve subjects were evaluated with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of OCD of at least 12 months' duration. Treatment lasted for 12 weeks, with a fixed dose of 450 mg of 0.3% hypericin (a psychoactive compound in Hypericum) twice daily (extended-release formulation). Weekly evaluations were conducted with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), the Patient Global Impressions of Improvement Scale, and the Clinical Global Impressions of Improvement scale (CGI) and monthly evaluation with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. RESULTS: A significant change from baseline to endpoint was found, with a mean Y-BOCS change of 7.4 points (p = .001). Significant change occurred at 1 week (p = .020) and continued to increase throughout the trial. At endpoint, 5 (42%) of 12 were rated "much" or "very much improved" on the clinician-rated CGI, 6 (50%) were "minimally improved," and 1 (8%) had "no change." The most common side effects reported were diarrhea (N = 3) and restless sleep (N = 2). CONCLUSION: Significant improvement was found with Hypericum, with a drop-in Y-BOCS score similar to that found in clinical trials. The fact that a significant change was found as early as 1 week into treatment suggests a possible initial placebo response, although improvement grew larger over time. Results warrant a placebo-controlled study of Hypericum in OCD.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".