Improved Mood and Behavior During Treatment with a Mineral-Vitamin Supplement: An Open-Label Case Series of Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have demonstrated that psychiatric symptoms such as depression, mood swings, and aggression may be ameliorated by supplementation with broad-based nutrient formulas containing vitamins, minerals, and sometimes essential fatty acids. These findings have been reported in young criminal offenders as well as in adults with mood disturbance and other psychiatric disorders. The purpose of the current case series was to explore the potential efficacy of a nutrient supplement in children. Children with mood and behavioral problems (N = 11; 7 boys, 4 girls; 8-15 years old) participated; 9 completed this open-label trial. Parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), Youth Outcome Questionnaire (YOQ), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) at entry and following at least 8 weeks of treatment. Intent-to-treat analyses revealed decreases on the YOQ (p < 0.001) and the YMRS (p < 0.01) from baseline to final visit. For the 9 completers, improvement was significant on seven of the eight CBCL scales, the YOQ, and the YMRS (p values from 0.05-0.001). Effect sizes for all outcome measures were relatively large. The findings suggest that formal clinical trials of broad nutritional supplementation are warranted in children with these psychiatric symptoms.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".