Dietary Supplement for Mood Symptoms in Early Postpartum: A Double-Blind Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial [ID 1781]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Postpartum blues (PPB) is a frequent syndrome of sad mood, crying spells, anxiety, restlessness, reduced appetite, and irritability, typically peaking day 5 postpartum. When severe, it greatly increases risk for later postpartum depression. This trial compared a dietary supplement to placebo on PPB severity. The supplement was designed to counter the downstream effects of elevated monoamine oxidase A level, which is implicated in causing PPB. METHODS: An oral supplement or identical-appearing inert placebo was administered in randomized, double-blind fashion. The supplement was blueberry juice and extract given four times between nighttime day 3 and morning day 5 postpartum; tryptophan, 2 g, nighttime day 4 postpartum, and tyrosine, 10 g, morning day 5 postpartum. On day 5, depressed mood induction procedure (MIP) and PPB were assessed. RESULTS: Participants took supplement (n=51) or placebo (n=52). There was no significant effect of MIP on visual analog scale for depressed mood (mean difference −0.39 mm; 95% CI, −6.42 to 5.65 mm). Stein Maternity Blues scores, PPB measure, was lower in the active group (effect size 0.62; median, interquartile range [IQR]: active 2.00 [IQR 1, 4]; placebo 4.00 [IQR 1.5, 6]; regression with general linear model, supplement effect, β coefficient of −1.50 [95% CI, −2.60, −0.40], P=.008; effect of CES-D crying category before supplement, P=.03–.00000023). Twenty-six and 40 different adverse events occurred within 25% and 42% of supplement and placebo cases, respectively (chi-squared, P=.06). CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: There was no effect on depressed mood induction; however, the supplement moderately reduced PPB.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".