In one paragraphArticle in Depression and anxiety, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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 registryThe 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 literatureWho cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
4 · The recordCorrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
5 · Who and what moneyAuthors and funding
10 authors.
Jiang WuThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1669-3070 Zhengzhi DengThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3472-6902 Xinyuan ChengThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3397-6678 Shaoqing LiThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4298-6836 Nan QiuThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0562-0298 Lan HuThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1973-787X Zhihong ChenThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7056-1335 Dezhong YaoThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8042-879X Li PuThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0066-3213 Hongmei YanThe Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, Sichuan Institute for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Intelligence, China-Cuba Belt and Road Joint Laboratory on Neurotechnology and Brain-apparatus communication, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China, uestc.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9629-1396 Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
6 · The paper itselfAbstract
Background: Anhedonia is a core symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD) and is associated with functional impairment, treatment resistance, and relapse. Emerging evidence suggests that anhedonia severity reflects distinct neural alterations; however, current neuromodulation protocols have not yet accounted for this clinical heterogeneity. We investigated whether intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) differentially modulates electroencephalography (EEG) microstate dynamics across anhedonia subtypes and aimed to identify electrophysiological signatures for treatment stratification. Method: Fifty MDD patients were stratified into high-anhedonia (HA, Results: At baseline, both patient groups showed reductions in microstates, MS_A and MS_D relative to HCs. The HA group additionally exhibited MS_C deficits, whereas the LA group showed MS_B reductions. TPs were decreased in both groups, with broader deficits in the HA group. Following iTBS, most microstate parameters of LA group no longer differed significantly from those of HCs, whereas the HA group exhibited only partial changes, with persistent abnormalities in MS_B duration, MS_C coverage, and MS_D parameters. Correlation analyses further revealed that, in the HA group, greater anhedonia improvement was associated with increased MS_A duration and decreased MS_B duration. Conclusion: iTBS exerts subtype-specific modulation of large-scale network dynamics in MDD with anhedonia. The LA group demonstrates treatment-associated resolution, whereas the HA group displays enduring integration deficits involving the dorsal attention network (DAN), sensory network (SN), and default mode network (DMN). Notably, in the HA group, clinical improvement correlates with SN reorganization, suggesting that microstate changes may serve as a treatment response marker. MS_D dynamics represent a candidate signature for subtype classification, supporting stratification-guided neuromodulation.
Indexed as
AnhedoniaDorsolateral Prefrontal CortexElectroencephalographyMajor Depressive DisorderTheta RhythmTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedanhedoniaEEG microstatesintermittent theta-burst stimulationmajor depressive disorderSnaith–Hamilton pleasure scale
Identifiers
PMID42769949
PMCPMC13591540
What OpenQuestion holds
Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390