Use of slow-release melatonin in treatment-resistant depression.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine antidepressant augmentation with and hypnotic effects of slow-release melatonin (SR-melatonin) in patients with treatment-resistant depression. DESIGN: Open-label trial. SETTING: Tertiary care outpatient depression clinic. PATIENTS: Nine outpatients who had failed to respond to 2 or more 8-week trials of antidepressant medication. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received SR-melatonin 5 mg per day for the first 2 weeks and 10 mg per day for the final 2 weeks, in addition to their antidepressant medication. OUTCOME MEASURES: Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, Axis 1 Disorders, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), Beck Depression Inventory, Response Style Questionnaire, sleep and fatigue measures. RESULTS: One patient was excluded after 1 week because of the development of a mixed affective state. In the remaining 8 patients there was a 20% mean decrease in HRSD scores after 4 weeks of treatment, with no individual achieving an improvement of 50% or more. There was a 36% decrease on the 3-item HRSD related to insomnia, with 4 of 8 patients showing at least a 50% improvement on this measure. The greatest decrease in insomnia occurred during the last 2 weeks of the study, following the increase in dosage to 10 mg per day of SR-melatonin. Patients also reported significantly lower levels of fatigue post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: SR-melatonin may be a useful adjunct for sleep, but does not substantially augment existing antidepressant therapies in some patients with treatment-resistant depression.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".