Light therapy for bipolar disorders: Clinical recommendations from the international society for bipolar disorders (ISBD) Chronobiology and Chronotherapy Task Force
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) Chronobiology and Chronotherapy Task Force conducted a comprehensive review to deliver concise evidence-based recommendations on the use of bright light therapy (BLT) for bipolar disorder (BD). Adjunctive BLT is likely an efficacious acute treatment for bipolar depression as implicated by higher quality evidence. The position of maintenance BLT for relapse prevention awaits further investigation. Protocols of effective BLT in BD are similar to parameters indicated for treatment of seasonal and non-seasonal major depressive disorder. Anti-manic prophylaxis (especially for BD-I) and clinical monitoring are recommended with initiation of and ongoing light treatment. Administer BLT daily, preferably in the morning or at mid-day. If mornings are prohibitive, then mid-day exposure, implemented to avoid excessively early wake times, is an acceptable alternative. Informed by the literature, target 30 min/day of BLT exposure. Patients wary of emergent hypomania or partial responders, can initiate 15 min/day and increase by 15 min each week to full response (or 30-60 min/day by the fourth week). Consider patient centred outcome assessments to evaluate mood response, safety and side effects. Clinical improvement is typically observed within 1-2 weeks, with response/remission expected by 4-6 weeks. Integration of BLT with other chronotherapeutic strategies may enhance long-term efficacy.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".