ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Polish adaptation of the Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS) - validation in the clinical sample.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS) Turkish Version: Examination of Psychometric Properties in Depressed and Ultra-High Risk/Psychotic Adolescents.The Psychiatric quarterly · 2026Article
- Article
- Which aspects of anhedonia predict response to pharmacotherapy in major depressive disorder?Psychological medicine · 2025Article
- Factor structure and longitudinal measurement invariance of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale during the whole perinatal period: a multicenter cohort study in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Insulin Resistance, Temperament and Personality Traits Are Associated with Anhedonia in a Transdiagnostic Sample.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- A Delphi consensus on clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of major depressive disorder patients with anhedonia amongst psychiatrists in the Asia-Pacific.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anhedonia is the core symptom of depression. Its presence has been linked to worsened prognosis. The Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS) is a scale measuring desire, motivation, effort and consummatory pleasure across different domains. The aim of this paper was to confirm factor structure, assess reliability and validity of the Polish adaptation of the DARS in a clinical sample of patients with mood disorders and healthy controls (HC). Methods: The study sample included 161 participants aged 18-65 years - 34 HC, 72 patients with bipolar disorder and 55 with major depressive disorder (in depressive episode or remission). Reliability of the Polish adaptation of the DARS was assessed using Cronbach's α and the average inter-item correlation (AIC). Convergent and divergent validity was established by Pearson's correlations between the DARS and the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology- self-report (QIDS-SR), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The structure of the scale was examined by factor analysis. Results: The factor structure was consistent with the original scale. Strong internal consistency for the DARS total score (Cronbach's α = 0.95) and all subscales (0.86-0.93) was observed. The DARS demonstrated good convergent (moderate to strong correlations with measures of anhedonia and depression) and divergent validity (weak correlations with anxiety level). Conclusion: The Polish DARS demonstrated excellent internal consistency and very good validity. The scale is a valuable contribution to the psychometrics of anhedonia measures in patients with mood disorders.
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.