Component

Human dysthymia Hamilton depression score

Human dysthymia Hamilton depression score

1 recorded relationships. Experimental role, claim status and evidence remain attached to each record.

How nutrients influence it

Every nutrient with a recorded effect on this component, credited to the nutrient that acted rather than the chapter that recorded it. Open a nutrient to see the findings and the conditions they were measured under.

How nutrients reach it in more than one step

Chains of two or more recorded steps that end here, grouped by the nutrient they start from. Each step is a separate finding, so a chain is a route a mechanism could take, not proof that it does.

Tracing routes…

What it does

Every recorded relationship this component is part of, grouped by its role. Plain wording comes first; the technical statement follows.

Recorded relationships

What acts on it

  1. The ALCAR–amisulpride trial did not meet its prespecified two-point noninferiority margin.

    Experimental context and source evidence
    evidence_access
    Indexed primary abstract/metadata only; unextracted doses, figures and methods remain unknown.
    experimental_contrast
    {"intervention": "ALCAR regimen", "comparator": "Amisulpride regimen", "endpoint": "The ALCAR–amisulpride trial did not meet its prespecified two-point noninferiority margin.", "effect_direction": "mixed", "combination": "single", "conditions": []} Explicit extracted experimental comparison; source-derived draft.
    experimental_model
    204 randomized; ALCAR 500 mg twice daily versus amisulpride 50 mg/day for 12 weeks.
    interpretation_status
    Source-derived curation with stated access limits; ungraded, not independent replication.
    limitations
    Limited to the recorded preparation, model, exposure and endpoint. Does not establish a human dietary deficiency, clinical benefit or unique molecular mediation.
    nutrient_topic
    Acetyl-L-carnitine collection; exact intervention and molecular form govern interpretation. · Acetyl-L-carnitine
    plain_language
    The ALCAR–amisulpride trial did not meet its prespecified two-point noninferiority margin.
    primary_references
    A double-blind, randomised, controlled clinical trial of acetyl-L-carnitine vs. amisulpride in the treatment of dysthymia. | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16316746/ | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2005.10.005
    source_locator
    Reviewed reference dysthymia-noninferiority; The confidence interval exceeded the prespecified margin by 0.46 points. A wider three-point margin discussed afterward does not replace the original test. Both arms improved; nonsignificant superiority does not prove equivalence.

    Acetyl-L-carnitine: detailed mechanisms of action (reviewed 6 October 2026) · lines 587–593

    AI-assisted original review of primary studies and clearly identified official records. Exact primary access is stated; no independent replication is claimed. · supports · 204 randomized; ALCAR 500 mg twice daily versus amisulpride 50 mg/day for 12 weeks. · Recorded from source · Recorded from source

    ### dysthymia-noninferiority The ALCAR–amisulpride trial did not meet its prespecified two-point noninferiority margin. The confidence interval exceeded the prespecified margin by 0.46 points. A wider three-point margin discussed afterward does not replace the original test. Both arms improved; nonsignificant superiority does not prove equivalence. Model and exposure: 204 randomized; ALCAR 500 mg twice daily versus amisulpride 50 mg/day for 12 weeks. Limitations: Limited to the recorded preparation, model, exposure and endpoint. Does not establish a human dietary deficiency, clinical benefit or unique molecular mediation. Reference: A double-blind, randomised, controlled clinical trial of acetyl-L-carnitine vs. amisulpride in the treatment of dysthymia. | 2006 | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16316746/ | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2005.10.005 | Access: Indexed primary abstract/metadata only; unextracted doses, figures and methods remain unknown.
    Complete structured claim and evidence

In the sources

Preserved passages that mention this component, quoted exactly. Open one to read it in context.

    This is a research prototype built from draft material. It is not medical advice, and its statements still await verification against the original studies.