Sleep architecture in ziprasidone-treated bipolar depression: a pilot study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effect of ziprasidone augmentation therapy on sleep architecture in bipolar depression. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical pilot trial of ziprasidone versus placebo in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition bipolar disorder with current major depressive episode. The effects during acute (2-5 days) and continuation treatment (28-31 days) were measured. Main outcomes were sleep architecture variables including rapid eye movement sleep (REM) and slow wave sleep (SWS) measured by polysomnography. Secondary outcomes included subjective sleep quality measures and illness severity measures including the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) and Clinical Global Illness Severity (CGI-S) scores. RESULTS: The completer analysis comprised of 14 patients (ziprasidone, N = 8 and placebo, N = 6). Latency to REM, duration of SWS, duration of stage 2 sleep, total sleep time, onset to sleep latency, number of awakenings and overall sleep efficiency significantly improved in ziprasidone-treated participants over placebo. CGI-S and HAMA scores also significantly improved. No significant difference between treatment groups was seen on the HAMD-17, MADRS or in self-reported sleep quality. Increase in SWS duration significantly correlated with improvement in CGI-S, however, this finding did not withstand Bonferroni correction. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive ziprasidone treatment alters sleep architecture in patients with bipolar depression, which may partially explain its mechanism of action and merits further investigation.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it