Physical and social anhedonia are associated with suicidality in major depression, but not in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study investigated the association of physical and social anhedonia with suicidality in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), schizophrenia, and in non-psychiatric controls. METHOD: All participants completed the revised Physical Anhedonia Scale (RPAS) and the revised Social Anhedonia Scale (RSAS) and were subdivided according to positive life-time suicide attempt history. MDD patients were evaluated with the Montgomery-Ãsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), healthy respondents with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and schizophrenia patients with the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). RESULTS: In 683 study participants, the prevalence of each anhedonia was the highest in MDD, followed by schizophrenia, and lowest in the control group. Among MDD patients, those with physical and social anhedonia had greater rates of recent suicidal ideation, while a higher frequency of individuals with life-time suicide attempts was detected in those with only social anhedonia. In contrast, no association between either anhedonia and life-time suicide attempts or recent suicidal ideation was found in patients with schizophrenia. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing social and physical anhedonia might be important in MDD patients, given its association with both life-time suicide attempts and recent suicidal ideation. Suicidality in schizophrenia, while unrelated to anhedonia, might include other risk factors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".