Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38463427›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024

A Delphi consensus on clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of major depressive disorder patients with anhedonia amongst psychiatrists in the Asia-Pacific.

Calvin Cheng, Keira Herr, Hong Jin Jeon, Tadafumi Kato, Chee H Ng, Yen Kuang Yang, Ling Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Calvin Cheng *Department of Psychiatry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Keira HerrJanssen Medical Affairs Asia Pacific, Singapore, Singapore.
Hong Jin Jeon *Department of Psychiatry, Depression Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Tadafumi Kato *Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Science, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Chee H Ng *The Melbourne Clinic, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Yen Kuang Yang *Department of Psychiatry, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan.
Ling Zhang *National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders & Mood Disorders Center, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Anhedonia, a core diagnostic feature for major depressive disorder (MDD), is defined as the loss of pleasure and interest in daily activities. Its prevalence in MDD patients vary from 35 to 70%. Anhedonia in MDD negatively impacts functioning and is associated with treatment resistance and poorer prognosis for various clinical outcomes. Owing to its complexity, there remains considerable heterogeneity in the conceptualization, diagnosis and clinical management of anhedonia in MDD. Methods: This modified Delphi panel was conducted to elicit expert opinion and establish consensus on concepts relating to clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of MDD with anhedonia (MDDwA) amongst psychiatrists in the Asia-Pacific region. Seven themes were covered. A three-stage process was adopted for consensus generation (two online survey rounds, followed by a moderated consensus meeting). Statements were developed based on a literature review and input from a steering committee of six regional experts. The panel included 12 psychiatrists practicing in Australia, China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan with ≥5 years of specialist clinical experience, including assessment or management of patients with MDDwA. Results: Overall, consensus was achieved (median ≥8) on 89/103 statements (86%). About half of the statements (55/103, 53%) achieved consensus in Round 1, and 29/36 modified statements achieved consensus in Round 2. At the moderated consensus meeting, five modified statements were discussed by the steering committee and consensus was achieved on all statements (5/5). The findings highlighted a lack of clear and practical methods in clinical practice for assessing anhedonia in MDD patients and limited physician awareness of anhedonia in Asia-Pacific. Conclusion: Insights from this Delphi consensus provide a reference point for psychiatrists in Asia-Pacific to optimize their strategies for personalized diagnosis and management of patients with MDDwA. Identification of distinct and clinically relevant subtypes in MDD may be valuable for guiding personalized diagnosis and management approaches, including type-specific therapies.

Indexed as

anhedoniaAsia PacificDelphi consensusDSM-5major depressive disorder

Identifiers

PMID38463427
PMCPMC10920342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.