Effects of Melatonin Supplementation on Muscle Strength, Manual Dexterity, and Postural Balance in Patients Living with Multiple sclerosis - A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our previous study revealed the benefits of chronic melatonin intake on dynamic postural imbalance and poor walking capacity induced by multiple sclerosis but its impact on muscle weakness and poor manual dexterity related to this disease has not yet been explored. The objective of the current study was to investigate the effectiveness of 12-week melatonin supplementation on motor skills (i.e., muscle strength, manual dexterity, and static postural balance) and psycho-cognitive status among multiple sclerosis patients. For that, twenty-seven patients were divided into melatonin group (MG, n = 15) and placebo group (PG, n = 12). Melatonin and placebo were each taken at a dose of 3 mg per night, 30 min before bedtime, for 12 weeks. Before and after the intervention, we assessed isokinetic knee muscle strength (dynamometer), manual dexterity (Nine-Hole Peg Test (NHPT)), static postural balance (force platform), mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)), and cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), and Trail Making Test (TMT)). The results showed that the peak torques of knee flexors (120°/s: p = 0.015, Hedges’g (g) = 1.84; 180°/s: p = 0.02, g = 2.06) and extensors (120°/s: p = 0.019, g = 1.63; 180°/s: p = 0.03, g = 2.01) increased in MG comparatively with PG. There was also a decrease in the sway area (bipedal stance) and mediolateral amplitude (unipedal stance) of the center of pressure in MG compared with PG in the eyes-open (both: p < 0.001; g = 4.32, g = 1.99, respectively) and eyes-closed (p = 0.0007, g = 1.31; p = 0.003, g = 1.79, respectively) conditions. The MG showed an increase in MoCA (p = 0.0006, g = 1.51) and SDMT (p = 0.02, g = 0.95) scores, as well as a decrease in HADS-Total score (p = 0.012, g = 1.06), TMT (p = 0.03, g = 0.91) and NHPT durations (p < 0.001, g = 2.36) comparatively with PG. Based on this study, the 12-week melatonin supplementation was effective in improving knee muscle strength, manual dexterity, static postural balance, mood, and cognition in multiple sclerosis patients. For clinical trial regsitration, this study was prospectively recorded in the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR202007465309582).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".