Kava Anxiety Depression Spectrum Study (KADSS): A mixed methods RCT using an aqueous extract of 'Piper methysticum'
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives\nTo report on the design, significance and potential impacts of the first documented human clinical trial assessing the anxiolytic and thymoleptic efficacy of an aqueous mono-extract of Piper methysticum (kava). The significance of the qualitative element of our clinical trial is also explored. The Kava Anxiety Depression Spectrum Study (KADSS) is a 3-week placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over trial involving 60 adult participants (18–65) with elevated stable anxiety and varying levels of depressive symptoms.\nAims\nThe aims of KADSS are: (1) to determine whether an aqueous standardised extract of kava is effective for the treatment of anxiety; (2) to assess the effects of kava on differing levels of depression; and (3) to explore participants’ experience of taking kava via qualitative research. The study also provides preliminary assessment of the safety of an aqueous extract of kava in humans.\nConclusion\nIf results reveal that the aqueous kava preparation exerts significant anxiolytic effects and appears safe, potentially beneficial impacts may occur. Data supporting a safe and effective kava extract may encourage a re-introduction of kava to Europe, UK and Canada. This may provide a major socioeconomic benefit to Pacific Island nations, and to sufferers of anxiety disorders.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".