Assessing Anhedonia in Major Depressive Disorder: A Focused Review of Measurement Tools and Patient-Centered Care
TL;DR
More multidimensional instruments may provide a fuller description of anhedonia than general depression scales alone, and whether use of these instruments improves shared decision-making, adherence, satisfaction, or clinical outcomes requires direct study.
Abstract
Objective: Anhedonia is a core symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD) that may persist despite improvement in overall depressive symptom scores. This mini review describes the use and characteristics of selected anhedonia instruments and considers their potential relevance to patient-centered assessment. Methods: Google Scholar, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for publications and registered studies from January 2016 through July 2026. Searches included the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), Chapman Physical and Social Anhedonia Scales (CPAS/CSAS), Fawcett-Clark Pleasure Capacity Scale (FCPS), Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS), Temporal Experience of Pleasure Scale (TEPS), and Anticipatory and Consummatory Interpersonal Pleasure Scale (ACIPS), combined with terms for MDD. Records were cross-referenced and duplicates removed. Eligible records involved adults with MDD and reported use of at least one selected instrument. Results: The search identified 14,161 records meeting the prespecified search criteria; however, because this number represents a bibliometric search yield rather than a systematically screened set of eligible studies, the search result should be interpreted as a search yield rather than a definitive estimate of eligible studies. The search yielded a precision estimate of 80%, and the scale-name search yield was 39%. Among records retained for instrument-use analysis, second-generation instruments accounted for approximately 93% of identified scale use. TEPS represented 71% and DARS 28% of second-generation instrument use. These findings describe observed use within the selected data sources and search strategy, not comparative clinical effectiveness. Conclusion: Available instruments differ in the dimensions of anhedonia assessed, including hedonic tone, social and physical pleasure, anticipatory pleasure, consummatory pleasure, motivation, and effort. More multidimensional instruments may provide a fuller description of anhedonia than general depression scales alone. Whether use of these instruments improves shared decision-making, adherence, satisfaction, or clinical outcomes requires direct study.