Pilot Study of the Effect of Ultraviolet Light on Pain and Mood in Fibromyalgia Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of effective systemic or adequate symptomatic treatment for pain associated with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Anecdotes suggest ultraviolet (UV) light may be of some benefit. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to determine if UV is effective in ameliorating chronic pain in persons with FMS. METHODS: Nineteen subjects with FMS were enrolled in a controlled trial of UV and non-UV (control) tanning beds for 2 weeks, followed by randomization to receive UV or non-UV (control) exposure for 6 additional weeks. A follow-up interview was conducted 4 weeks after the last treatment. Pain was assessed with an 11-point numerical pain rating (Likert scale), a visual analogue pain scale (VAS), and the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Mood variables were also assessed. RESULTS: During the initial 2 weeks when subjects received both UV and non-UV (control) exposures, the 11-point Likert scale pain score decreased 0.44 points after exposure to UV from pre-exposure levels (S.E. = .095). Additionally, UV exposure resulted in greater positive affect, well-being, relaxation, and reduced pain levels when compared to non-UV (control) exposure (Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.80, p = 0.0059). Following the randomized treatment period, there was slight improvement in pain as measured by the McGill Pain Questionnaire in the UV group compared to the non-UV (control) group (12.2 versus 14.1; p = 0.049); the other pain scales yielded nonsignificant results. Assessment 4 weeks after the last treatment showed no significant differences in scores in the adjusted means for outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this pilot study suggest that tanning beds may have some potential in reducing pain in persons with FMS.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".