Functional Neuroimaging Biomarkers of Anhedonia Response to Adjunct Aripiprazole Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anhedonia is a common, yet often overlooked symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD). Currently, there are no approved treatments for this symptom. Aripiprazole, an adjunct treatment for MDD, may be a potential treatment. Aripiprazole increases activity of dopamine, the main neurotransmitter implicated in anhedonia. In the current study, the effectiveness of aripiprazole for treating anhedonia, and potential resting-state functional neuroimaging biomarkers of improvement in anhedonia after aripiprazole treatment, were explored. Eighty-six participants with MDD were treated with eight-weeks of aripiprazole. Aripiprazole was associated with a significant improvement in anhedonia symptoms. Increased functional connectivity between the salience and default mode networks; and between the nucleus accumbens and brain regions implicated in neural transmission predicted improvement in anhedonia. Therefore, aripiprazole may represent an effective treatment for anhedonia as part of MDD. Further, particular functional connectivity patterns in the brain may be able to identify who will or will not respond to aripiprazole.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".