Chen · Journal of affective disorders 2024 · network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials · n=21 studies (1037 participants)

Treatment measures for seasonal affective disorder: A network meta-analysis.

Cited 17 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 38220102 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2024.01.028 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

A systematic review and network meta-analysis searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases (January 1975 to December 3, 2022) for randomized controlled trials evaluating mainstream therapies for seasonal affective disorder, including phototherapy, antidepressants, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and negative ion generators. Depression score outcomes were synthesized using standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals.

What was found

The review included 21 randomized controlled trials comprising 1037 participants. Phototherapy was significantly more effective than other intervention groups or controls in reducing depression scores, with a reported effect size of 4.64 (95% CI: 2.38 to 7.03). Subgroup analyses failed to identify factors explaining the marked heterogeneity observed across trials. Specific numerical outcomes for the other evaluated interventions were not reported in the abstract.

Why it matters

This synthesis supports bright light therapy as an effective first-line non-pharmacological treatment for seasonal affective disorder, though overall evidence quality remains modest.

Limits

The primary evidence base has low overall quality and high unexplained heterogeneity across trials. The abstract omits numerical results for the other compared active treatments (antidepressants, cognitive-behavioral therapy, negative ion generators) and notes an absence of long-term follow-up and large-scale multicenter data.

Cited by