Cochrane · systematic review · CD011269

Light therapy for preventing seasonal affective disorder

Nussbaumer‐Streit, B, Forneris, CA, Morgan, LC, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library

Common Mental Disorders2 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed

SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.

Questions

current version

GRADE rated

No studies

Included studies

No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 12 · 100%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Show all 2 versions

Bright white light therapy compared with no light therapy for prevention of SAD

Population: all participants were known SAD patients who had been successfully treated with conventional light therapy in previous winters

3 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Incidence of SAD (SIGH‐SAD score ≥ 20) ( Bright white light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 0.64 [0.3, 1.38]	1 study · 23 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Incidence of severe SAD (SIGH‐SAD‐SR (≥ 40)) ( Bright white light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 0.21 [0.03, 1.75]	1 study · 23 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Overall discontinuation ( Bright white light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 2.22 [0.29, 17.27]	1 study · 28 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Infrared light therapy compared with no light therapy for prevention of SAD

Population: all participants were known SAD patients who had been successfully treated with conventional light therapy in previous winters

3 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Incidence of SAD (SIGH‐SAD score ≥ 20) ( Infrared light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 0.5 [0.21, 1.17]	1 study · 24 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Incidence of severe SAD (SIGH‐SAD‐SR (≥ 40)) ( Infrared light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 0.2 [0.02, 1.64]	1 study · 24 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Overall discontinuation ( Infrared light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 1.67 [0.2, 13.98]	1 study · 28 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Light therapy compared with no light therapy for prevention of SAD

Population: all participants were known SAD patients who had been successfully treated with conventional light therapy in previous winters

3 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Incidence of SAD (SIGH‐SAD score ≥ 20) ( Light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 0.57 [0.3, 1.1]	1 study · 38 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Incidence of severe SAD (SIGH‐SAD‐SR (≥ 40)) ( Light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 0.21 [0.04, 1.05]	1 study · 38 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Overall discontinuation ( Light therapy vs no light therapy	RR 1.94 [0.27, 14.01]	1 study · 46 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Bright white light therapy compared with infrared light therapy for prevention of SAD

Population: all participants were known SAD patients who had been successfully treated with conventional light therapy in previous winters

3 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Incidence of SAD (SIGH‐SAD score ≥ 20) ( Bright white light therapy vs infrared light therapy	RR 1.29 [0.5, 3.28]	1 study · 29 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Incidence of severe SAD (SIGH‐SAD‐SR (≥ 40)) ( Bright white light therapy vs infrared light therapy	RR 1.07 [0.07, 15.54]	1 study · 29 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Overall discontinuation ( Bright white light therapy vs infrared light therapy	RR 1.33 [0.35, 5.13]	1 study · 36 participants	Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision