Efficacy and safety of St. John's wort for the treatment of major depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Extracts of St. John's wort have been widely used in the treatment of depression. Our aim was to review information related to the efficacy and safety of St. John's wort as an antidepressant. DATA SOURCES: Primary and review articles were identified by a search of Medline (1960 to February 2000) and through secondary sources. STUDY SELECTION: All the articles identified from the data sources were evaluated and all relevant information was included in this review. The pharmacokinetics, mechanism of action, efficacy, side effects and drug interactions of St. John's wort have been examined in various studies. CONCLUSION: St. John's wort is a promising investigational antidepressant, but the data are not yet sufficient to accept hypericum as a first line antidepressant preparation for treatment of depression. Besides the need for dose standardization and adequate trial lengths, there is a need for studies in severely depressed patients and long-term studies to assess the risk of relapse and recurrence.
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) | 0.001 | 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".