Anhedonia is associated with a specific depression profile and poor antidepressant response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anhedonic features within major depressive disorder (MDD) have been associated with worse course and outcome and may predict nonresponse to treatment. However, a detailed clinical profile of anhedonia in MDD is still lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One thousand two hundred ninety-four patients with MDD were selected from the cross-sectional European multicenter Group for the Study of Resistant Depression study. Anhedonia was assessed through the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale anhedonia item "inability to feel." Clinical and demographic features were then analyzed. RESULTS: The presence of anhedonia related to a distinct demographical (living alone) and clinical profile (thyroid diseases, diabetes, suicide risk, high number of previous depressive episodes, more severe MDD, and more frequent inpatient status). Furthermore, anhedonia was associated with nonresponse to treatment and treatment resistance, even after adjusting for confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the role of anhedonia as a modulating feature of MDD, being associated with a more severe depression profile. Moreover, anhedonic features are independent predictors of poor treatment response.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".