Modafinil reduces excessive somnolence and enhances mood in patients with myotonic dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential of modafinil in reducing excessive daytime somnolence (EDS) and enhancing indexes of quality of life and mood in patients with myotonic dystrophy (DM). METHODS: Forty patients with DM were randomized to receive modafinil and placebo for 14 days each, using a double-blind, cross-over design. Before and after each trial, subjects completed handgrip strength testing, spirometry, and quality-of-life measures (RAND). On days 7 and 14, each subject completed the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS), and the Profile of Mood States (POMS). RESULTS: ESS scores were lower while taking modafinil (mean 248 mm; 95% confidence limit 220 to 276 mm) as compared with placebo (309 mm; 281 to 336 mm) (p < 0.001). Mean SSS scores were also lower during the modafinil trial (3.05; 2.77 to 3.33) than during the placebo trial (3.45; 3.18 to 3.71) (p < 0.05). The POMS indicated that modafinil decreased fatigue-inertia (p < 0.001) and increased vigor-activity and tension-anxiety (p < 0.001) indexes. The total mood disturbance score was also decreased during the modafinil trial as compared with placebo (p < 0.05). The RAND quality-of-life measures of energy (p < 0.001) and health change (p < 0.05) were both significantly enhanced during the modafinil treatment phase. No changes in maximal grip strength or forced expired volume in 1 second were detected over the course of the study. Headache was the most frequently reported adverse event. Four patients withdrew from the study, three because of side effects (two during modafinil ingestion and one during placebo ingestion). CONCLUSION: Modafinil reduces somnolence and improves mood in patients with DM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".