MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288698389 · doi:10.1056/nejm-jw.na39724

Light Therapy for Nonseasonal Depression

2015· article· en· W2288698389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven Dubovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal watch · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlaceboFluoxetineLight therapyMedicinePillDepression (economics)Double blindPsychiatryInternal medicinePharmacologySerotoninCircadian rhythmAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the potential usefulness of artificial bright light in nonseasonal depression, investigators in Canada randomized 122 medication-free patients with moderately severe, nonpsychotic, nonbipolar major depression to one of four 8-week, double-blind treatments: fluoxetine (20 mg) + 30 minutes of bright light (10,000 lux) in the mornings, pill placebo + bright light, fluoxetine + light placebo (inactive negative-ion generator), or double placebo …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal watchSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207