ArticlePsychopharmacology2020
Comparison of acute treatment with delayed-onset versus rapid-acting antidepressants on effort-related choice behaviour.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preclinical models for evaluating psychedelics in the treatment of major depressive disorder.British journal of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Neurochemical drivers of effort: The roles of dopamine and beyond in physical and cognitive exertion.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2026Review
- Validation of a non-food or water motivated effort-based foraging task as a measure of motivational state in male mice.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Characterisation of behaviours relevant to apathy syndrome in the aged male rat.Behavioural brain research · 2024Article
- Pharmacological characterisation of the effort for reward task as a measure of motivation for reward in male mice.Psychopharmacology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleReward-related impairments are common in major depressive disorder (MDD) and may contribute to the loss of interest in pleasurable activities. A novel approach to studying reward-related decision-making are effort-based tasks; however, direct comparisons between delayed-onset and rapid-acting antidepressants (ADs) have not yet been carried out.
objectivesTo investigate the effects of conventional delayed-onset ADs versus rapid-acting ADs, ketamine and scopolamine, on effort-related choice behaviour.
methodsFemale Lister hooded rats were trained in an operant effort for reward task (EfRT) where animals choose between working for a high value-high effort reward and consuming low value-low effort chow. Using a within-subject study design, animals were then tested following acute treatment with different monoaminergic ADs, and the rapid-acting ADs ketamine or scopolamine.
resultsConsistent with previous findings, we found choice behaviour was sensitive to dopaminergic manipulations. We observed that pre-feeding altered choice behaviour and that the use of high or low value reward differentially affected behaviour. Monoamine re-uptake inhibitors and rapid-acting ADs resulted in similar, general patterns of reduced motivation without any evidence for specific effects, and we did not observe any clear differences between these classes of antidepressant.
conclusionsMotivational changes induced by dopaminergic manipulations and pre-feeding differentially affect effort choice behaviour. However, both conventional delayed-onset ADs and ketamine and scopolamine appear to have detrimental effects on motivation in this task at the higher doses tested without any evidence of specificity for effort-related choice behaviour, in contrast to their specificity in tasks which look at more cognitive aspects of reward processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.