Examining the Efficacy of Bright Light Therapy on Cognitive Function in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients who have undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) may experience cognitive impairment that can persist after treatment. Several studies have shown that bright light therapy may improve cognition, potentially due to its effects on the circadian system via brain regions that respond preferentially to light. In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, the efficacy of bright light therapy on cognition was examined in HSCT survivors. Forty-seven HSCT survivors at an urban hospital in the United States were screened for mild cognitive impairment, randomized to either bright white light (BWL) or comparison dim red light (DRL) conditions using a block randomization approach, and instructed to use their assigned light box every morning upon awakening for 30 min for 4 weeks. Assessments occurred at baseline, the end of the second week of the intervention, the end of the intervention, and at follow-up (8 weeks later). The primary outcome was objective cognitive function as measured by a global composite score on neuropsychological tests. Secondary outcomes included cognitive performance in individual domains, self-reported cognitive function, fatigue, sleep and sleep quality, and circadian rhythm robustness. Repeated-measures linear mixed models for both objective and self-reported cognitive function indicated significant main effects for time ( ps < 0.05) suggesting significant improvements in both conditions over time. Time by light condition interaction effects were not significant. Models focused on secondary outcomes yielded no significant effects. Both BWL and DRL groups demonstrated significant improvements in objective cognitive and self-reported cognitive function over time, but there was no hypothesized effect of BWL over DRL nor associations with circadian rhythm robustness. Therapeutic effects of both light conditions, practice effects, and/or placebo effects may account for the findings. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02677987 (9 February 2016)
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".