ArticleAnnals of general psychiatry2026
Patient perspectives on the challenges, obstacles, and opportunities in discussing and managing anhedonia in major depressive disorder (MDD): a focus group study.
Article in Annals of general psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a common mental health disorder and a leading cause of disease burden. Anhedonia—defined for participants in this study as diminished interest, motivation, or ability to experience pleasure in daily activities—is a core symptom required for diagnosis of MDD and may persist despite treatment. Limited awareness and shared understanding of anhedonia between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) may complicate communication during clinical encounters, highlighting an ongoing need to better characterize how this symptom is recognized and discussed in clinical practice.
methodsThis Johnson & Johnson (J&J) Patient Engagement Research Council (PERC) focus group study explored patient perspectives on conversations with HCPs about anhedonia and perceived barriers to these discussions. Four focus group sessions were conducted virtually in Nov-Dec 2023, with n = 12 adult patients with moderate-to-severe MDD in the US, using a semi-structured discussion guide to stimulate discussion and patient feedback.
resultsAcross discussions, participants reported that conversations about anhedonia were more commonly initiated by patients (n = 8/12) than by HCPs (n = 7/12 reporting that HCPs rarely or never initiated such discussions). Participants also reported that treatment options specifically addressing anhedonia were infrequently discussed (n = 9/12). Perceived barriers to effective communication included time-constrained appointments, uncertainty or limited awareness of anhedonia, and discouragement related to prior ineffective treatment experiences. Participant-derived recommendations focused on the potential value of patient and HCP education, including educational materials for patients and HCPs, proactive screening protocols or structured prompts to facilitate discussion, and regular follow-up visits to revisit symptoms over time.
conclusionsThese findings from a small, purposive sample suggest that challenges in discussing anhedonia during clinical visits may contribute to its limited consideration in ongoing care, underscoring the need for approaches that better support recognition and dialogue around this multifaceted symptom within routine clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.