Journal of affective disorders · 2025
Effect of photobiomodulation intervention for depressive symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Seok Ji-Woo, Kim Kahye, Kim Jaeuk U, Kim Jung-Dae
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although photobiomodulation (PBM) has been investigated as a non-invasive treatment for reducing depressive symptoms, its effectiveness and optimal treatment settings remain unknown. This meta-analysis assessed the overall impact of PBM on depressive symptoms and analyzed significant moderators affecting treatment outcomes.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed 18 PBM intervention trials including individuals with major depressive disorder or clinically significant depressive symptoms. Effect sizes (Hedges' g) were pooled, and moderator analyses were conducted using meta-regression and subgroup comparisons. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and the trim-and-fill method.
RESULTS: PBM showed a moderate overall effect in reducing depressive symptoms (Hedges' g = -0.47, 95 % CI: -0.73 to -0.22). Importantly, systemic PBM (sPBM) demonstrated significantly larger effects than those of transcranial PBM (tPBM), underscoring their distinct mechanistic and methodological profiles. Laser-based PBM was more effective than LED-based PBM, and longer treatment duration was associated with greater therapeutic benefits, whereas irradiance and treatment frequency were not significant moderators.
CONCLUSIONS: PBM appears to be a promising treatment option for depressive symptoms. The clear difference between sPBM and tPBM highlights the need for modality-specific optimization and further large-scale trials to establish standardized therapeutic protocols.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed 18 PBM intervention trials including individuals with major depressive disorder or clinically significant depressive symptoms. Effect sizes (Hedges' g) were pooled, and moderator analyses were conducted using meta-regression and subgroup comparisons. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and the trim-and-fill method.
RESULTS: PBM showed a moderate overall effect in reducing depressive symptoms (Hedges' g = -0.47, 95 % CI: -0.73 to -0.22). Importantly, systemic PBM (sPBM) demonstrated significantly larger effects than those of transcranial PBM (tPBM), underscoring their distinct mechanistic and methodological profiles. Laser-based PBM was more effective than LED-based PBM, and longer treatment duration was associated with greater therapeutic benefits, whereas irradiance and treatment frequency were not significant moderators.
CONCLUSIONS: PBM appears to be a promising treatment option for depressive symptoms. The clear difference between sPBM and tPBM highlights the need for modality-specific optimization and further large-scale trials to establish standardized therapeutic protocols.