+ + +
Depression Clinical Study: pg 3 of 5 using NADH - Life's Energy Source
Back Forward
Medical Conditions Library: Home
2nd: Necessities
Order some energy
Product info & price
FAQs
Alzheimer's Section
Depression Section
Parkinson's Section
Chronic Fatigue
Depression study
Background
Summary
Results / Tables
Discussion
Footnotes
...
DEPRESSION (pg 3 of 5)
ACTUAL CLINICAL STUDY:
. . . continued from the previous page

A New Therapeutic Approach for Treating DEPRESSION. NADH is a safe, potent, biological (natural) ANTIDEPRESSIVE Agent.
Experience with 205 Patients

RESULTS
All the patients included in this open label trial are listed in Table 1.

  • The individuals patients have been registered by initials according to the parameters: sex, age, degree of depression before and after therapy, improvement and duration of therapy. 112 (53.6 %) of the patients included in the trial were male.
  • The descriptive statistics of the 4 parameters age, duration of therapy, disability before treatment and improvement after treatment.
  • The age of the patients ranged from 36 to 91 years with a mean value of 71.7 +/ - 9.09.
  • The duration of therapy lasted from 3 to 310 days with a mean value of 19.5 +/ - 14.40. The overall improvement of the depression was 11.5 +/- 8.95 with a maximum of 44.
Tables 3 and 4 relate the dependent variable improvement to the independent variables age and disability before treatment. For each combination of the categories of the two variables, two entries are displayed. The first entry is the number of patients in that cell and the second entry is the column percentage. For example, 16 of the 49 (32.7%) patients not older than 65 show an improvement less than 10. For these little disabled patients, it is not possible, not even theoretically, to show an improvement greater than 10. Analogously, patients with disability before treatment less than 20 cannot show an improvement greater than 20, and so forth. For this reason and because possible correlations between the independent variables, tables 3 and 4 should be interpreted with caution.
Table 2: Summary Statistics
Variable

N

Mean

St. E.

St. D.

Min.

Max.

Median
Age (y)

209

71.1

0.63

9.09

36

91

72
Duration (d)

209

19.5

1.96

28.29

3

310

14
Disability bef.

209

28.6

1

14.4

4

75

30
Improvement

209

11.5

0.62

8.95

-6

44

10
Table 3: Improvement versus age
Age
Impr.

< 65

66 -70

71-75

> 75

 Row Total

< 5
___

16
32.7%

12
29.3%

16
40.0%

25
31.6%

69
33.0%

6 -10
____

9
18.4%

9
22.0%

7
17.5%

20
25.3%

45
21.5%

11-15
____

9
18.4%

8
19.5%

9
22.5%

17
21.5%

43
20.6%

16-20
____

6
12.2%

7
17.1%

3
7.5%

9
11.4%

25
12.0%

21-25
____

2
4.1%

1
2.4%

1
2.5%

5
6.3%

9
4.3%

>26
____

7
14.3%

4
9.8%

4
10.0%

3
3.8%

18
8.6%

Column Total

49
23.4%

41
19.6%

40
19.1%

79
37.8%

209
100.0%
Table 4: Improvement versus disability before treatment
Disability before treatment
Impr.

< 10

11-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

>50

 Row Total

< 5
____

20
95.2%

21
42.0%

10
19.2%

8
13.8%

8
47.1%

2
18.2%

69
33.0%

6-10
____

1
4.8%

21
42.0%

14
26.9%

8
13.8%

1
5.9%

45
21.5%

11-15
____

7
14.0%

16
30.8%

17
29.3%

3
17.6%

43
20.6%

15-20
____

1
2.0%

10
19.2%

12
20.7%

1
5.9%

1
9.1%

25
12.0%

5
____

2
3.8%

7
12.1%

9
4.3%

6
____

6
10.3%

4
23.5%

8
72.7%

18
8.6%

Column Total

21
10.0%

50
23.9%

52
24.9%

58
27.8%

17
8.1%

11
5.3%

209
100.0%
For an accurate assessment of the real relationship between age and improvement it is necessary to subtract the effects of the disability before treatment. In doing this we grouped the patients into 2 categories: marked responders (improvement of disability greater than half the original value before therapy) and non-responders or slight responders (improvement less than or equal to half the original value). To avoid classification of an improvement from 5 to 2 as marked response, we excluded the 21 patients with a disability before treatment less than or equal to 10 from further analysis. Table 5 summarizes the distribution of the variables age, duration of therapy, disability before treatment, and improvement after treatment for the remaining 188 patients (103 male). Table 6 relates the response to age separately for various categories of disability before treatment. It turns out that younger patients (<65 years old) have a better chance to gain a marked improvement than older patients.
Table 5: Summary statistics
Variable

N

Mean

St.E.

St.D.

Min.

Max.

Median
Age (y)

188

71.2

0.66

9.10

36

91

72
Duration (d)

188

19.7

2.05

28.13

3

310

14
Disability bef.

188

31.0

0.96

13.16

11

75

30
Improvement

188

12.5

0.65

8.84

-3

44

11
Table 6: Percentages of patients with marked improvement
Age
Disab. bef.

<65

66-70

71-75

>75

 Row Total

11-20
____

8/15
53.3%

3/8
37.5%

2/11
18.2%

6/16
37.5%

19/50
38.0%

21-30
____

5/9
55.6%

4/12
33.3%

4/10
40.0%

6/21
28.6%

19/52
36.5%

31-40
____

4/11
36.4%

3/14
21.4%

2/9
22.2%

7/24
29.2%

16/58
27.6%

41-50
____

3/6
50.0%

0/1
0.0%

0/1
0.0%

1/9
11.1%

4/17
23.5%

>50
____

1/3
33.3%

1/2
50.0%

1/4
25.0%

0/2
0.0%

3/11
27.3%
The last row in table 6 is a statistical artifact due to small N and therefore does not impair this general result.

. . . continued on the next page
To the top of this page
Back Forward

©1996-2008_Renascent_Systems_Inc_All_rights_reserved_Rev01/2008
See_disclaimers_and_copyrights_Contact_us: 800-928-NADH (6234)
  This page is intended for education & information,  not medical advice.
  Please consult a medical professional, if you have questions about your health.