The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Letters to the EditorFull Access

Outcome Variation in the Randomized Trial of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Versus Light Therapy for Seasonal Affective Disorder

To the Editor: The authors of the article on treatment of seasonal affective disorder (SAD), published in the September 2015 issue of the Journal (1), conclude that the findings suggest that cognitive-behavioral therapy for SAD and light therapy are comparably effective for SAD. The article did show a lack of difference between treatments but did not analyze for noninferiority. The proportions of study participants in each treatment group who remitted were –14.7 to 15.5, as determined by the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression–SAD Version, and were –22.5 to 7.1, as determined by the Beck Depression Inventory–Second Edition (ranges reflect a 95% CI). These proportions indicate a wide difference in possible outcomes showing that we cannot say the treatments are comparable.

From Zucker Hillside Hospital, North Shore–Long Island Jewish Health System, Glen Oaks, N.Y.

The author reports no financial relationships with commercial interests.

Reference

1 Rohan KJ, Mahon JN, Evans M, et al.: Randomized trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder: acute outcomes. Am J Psychiatry 2015; 172:862–869LinkGoogle Scholar