An Open Trial of Light Therapy in Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In adults with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a delayed sleep/ activity rhythm and/or seasonal mood symptoms may contribute significantly to core pathology and disability. This study examined whether a chronobiologically based treatment, i.e., morning bright light therapy (LT), might have utility as an adjunctive treatment for adult ADHD in the fall/ winter period. METHOD: Twenty-nine adults with DSM-IV ADHD were administered a standard 3-week open trial of LT during the fall or winter months. Primary outcome measures included percentage reduction on the Brown Adult ADD Scale and the Conners' Adult ADHD Scale. Secondary measures were decrease in depression scores according to the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Seasonal Affective Disorder version; improvements on various neuropsychological tests; and shift toward an earlier circadian preference as measured by the Horne-Ostberg Morningness-Eveningness questionnaire. Regression analyses determined which variables at baseline best predicted improvement on a given outcome measure and which variables changed in parallel with one another. The study was conducted from November 2003 through February 2004. RESULTS: Morning bright light therapy was associated with a significant decrease in both subjective and objective measures of core ADHD pathology, improved mood symptoms, and a significant phase advance in circadian preference. Multiple regression showed that the shift toward an earlier circadian preference with LT was the strongest predictor of improvement on both subjective and objective ADHD measures. Neither baseline global seasonality scores nor baseline depression scores strongly predicted LT effects on most measures of ADHD. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that during the fall/winter period, LT may be a useful adjunct in many adults with ADHD. Strikingly, the strongest correlate of improvement in core ADHD pathology was a phase advance in circadian preference rather than alleviation of comorbid seasonal affective disorder, suggesting important clinical benefits of LT beyond the treatment of seasonal affective disorder.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".