This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Jonathan W. Stewart, MD
New York State Psychiatric Institute 722 W 168th St New York, NY 10032

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(10):921.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Because they found no difference in efficacy between short and long photoperiod treatments, Wehr and colleagues1 presented the possibly misleading conclusion that short photoperiod light is an effective treatment for seasonal affective disorder. We do not use the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale as a determinant of response but rather the global improvement rating on the Clinical Global Impressions Scale. Nevertheless, it is very rare that we will consider someone to have responded to a treatment when the Hamilton score is 10 or more. Since light therapy has virtually no side effects that could inflate the Hamilton scale, it is quite clear that someone must be at least somewhat symptomatic to have a Hamilton score of 10, 12, or 16. Thus, the patients of Wehr et al seem to have partially improved with the treatment but quite clearly are still somewhat symptomatic. In contrast, we regu- larly find . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?