MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774365676 · doi:10.20381/ruor-21297

Shedding Light on SAD: The Effects of Light Therapy in the Treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder

2016· article· en· W2774365676 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire Kim, Rayhan Pitigala

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLight therapyPsychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatryClinical psychologyMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) consists of recurrent depressive episodes in the fall/winter with summer remission. Symptoms include hypersomnia, fatigue, increased appetite for carbohydrates, and weight gain. The estimated prevalence of SAD is 1.7-2.9% in Canada and is most common in women of reproductive age. Light therapy (LT) is an effective, evidence-based treatment for SAD despite economic and lifestyle burdens. There is a critical need to better understand and evaluate current LT application to determine an optimal treatment strategy for SAD in the future. Objective: To explore the relevant literature regarding the efficacy and physiological and psychological impacts of light therapy in the treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder among the Canadian adult population. Methodology: Relevant literature was identified using key terms “Seasonal Affective Disorder” and “Phototherapy” or “Light therapy” to search four online databases PubMed, PsychINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus. Results were limited to Canadian publications from 2006 and only included journal articles, clinical trials, meta-analyses, RCTs, and systematic reviews in English. Titles and abstracts were evaluated for relevancy to the objective and inclusion criteria; 7 articles based on Canadian study populations were then subject to analysis. Results: The results were categorized into three themes (efficacy of LT, physiological effects, and psychological effects) and indicated that LT is an effective treatment option for SAD, normalizing physiological SAD symptoms and decreasing SIGH-SAD scores. Conclusions: LT is an effective treatment for SAD with physiological and psychological effects. Further research needs to establish Canadian incidence and morbidity statistics, in addition to indicators/biomarkers for SAD diagnosis and links to symptomatology. Future studies should compare different SAD therapies and develop a standard for efficient LT with long-term and preventative applications as well as optimal compliance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207