The Effect of the Apollo Neuro Device on Anxiety Among Participants who Underwent Ketamine Assisted Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a device called “Apollo” in reducing anxiety, as compared to a control group. Participants were divided into two groups: the intervention group (receiving the “Apollo” device) and the control group (receiving no intervention). Objectives The primary outcome measure was the change in Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scores, calculated as the difference between post-GAD-7 and pre-GAD-7 scores. Methods Participants were recruited from two different cohorts, with the intervention group derived from the “Apollo” dataset and the control group derived from the “KaT Cohort 9” dataset. Matching was performed based on Age, Sex, and pre-GAD-7 scores to create comparable groups. For those with full datasets, a total of 4 (out of 5) participants from the “Apollo” group were matched with 15 (out of 45) participants from the “Control” group, based on the selected criteria. Data cleaning was performed to handle missing values and non-numeric entries. Propensity score matching was used to match participants from the “Apollo” and “Control” groups based on Age, Sex, and pre-GAD-7 scores. An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare the mean change in GAD-7 scores between the two groups. Since propensity score matching requires complete data on matching factors (age, sex, pre-GAD-7), those without full datasets were excluded. Results The median change in GAD-7 scores in the “Apollo” group was −8.5, indicating a median reduction in anxiety symptoms.The independent samples t-test revealed no statistically significant difference in the change in GAD-7 scores between the “Apollo” and “Control” groups (t = -0.889, p = 0.387). Therefore, the study so far did cannot conclude a significant difference. Conclusions Ketamine assisted therapy remains a promising way to decrease anxiety among patients with generalized anxiety disorder and elevated GAD-7 scores. Ways to potentially improve these results are increasing the number of Apollo patients and having more balanced numbers between groups. Disclosure of Interest None Declared
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".