Emotional DistressiPETNCT07288541
Promoting Positive Emotions in Adolescents Using Positive Events Training: An Indicated Approach
A study testing Positive Events Training (PET) in people with Emotional Distress and Anhedonia, run by KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
Research shows that high positive emotionality is an essential ingredient in building resilience in youngsters, especially those with a vulnerability to develop depressive symptomatology. It may empower them against actual depression and its various long-term adverse outcomes. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 12 to 16 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Emotional Distress, Anhedonia
- What is being tested?
- Positive Events Training (PET)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 36 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- Oct 2026to Dec 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 12 to 16 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- 12-16 years (age)
- mild-severe level of baseline depressive symptoms Exclusion Criteria: /
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Liesbeth Bogaert contact
Belgium1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Praktijkcentrum PraxisP
Leuven, 3000
Liesbeth Bogaert, 3216 32 62 66, liesbeth.bogaert@kuleuven.be
About this study
Official title: Promoting Positive Emotions in Adolescents Using Positive Event Training: An Indicated Approach (iPET)
Research shows that high positive emotionality is an essential ingredient in building resilience in youngsters, especially those with a vulnerability to develop depressive symptomatology. It may empower them against actual depression and its various long-term adverse outcomes. One way to achieve positive emotions is via the recollection and anticipation of specific positive events. Therefore, to cultivate positive emotions in young people, a user-friendly group training program was developed, translated from basic research findings: Positive Event Training (PET). Through PET, adolescents learn to solidify positive memories and positive plans for the future. In this project, a comprehensive evaluation of PET's efficacy is conducted using a robust methodology with vulnerable youth.
- Conditions
- Emotional Distress, Anhedonia
- Being tested
- Positive Events Training (PET)
- Keywords
- positive emotions, anhedonia, positive affect regulation, emotional distress, autobiographical thinking
- Medical subject headings
- Anhedonia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Positive Events Training (PET)Behavioural
Positive Event Training or PET is a group-based training program combining Memory Specificity Training (MEST; Raes, 2007) and Future Event Specificity Training (FEST; Dutch version of Hallford et al. (2020): Changing the Future: An initial test of Future Specificity Training).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Positive Events Training (PET) | Experimental | Not described Receives: Behavioral: Positive Events Training (PET) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Daily-life positive emotions measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Kirtley et al., 2022)
Mean value of four daily diary items (i.e., "How relaxed, content, enthusiast, good do you feel?"), rated on a 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("a lot") rating scale. Higher values represent, higher levels of positive emotions (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life positive emotions measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Kirtley et al., 2022)
Mean value of four daily diary items (i.e., "How relaxed, content, enthusiast, good do you feel?"), rated on a 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("a lot") rating scale. Higher values represent, higher levels of positive emotions (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life anhedonia measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Mean value of three daily diary items tapping into difficulties experiencing consummatory pleasure, anticipatory pleasure and motivational difficulties using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you find it difficult to enjoy yourself?"; "To what extent did you look forward to doing enjoyable things? (reverse-scored), "Conditional: if 0-50 ("not at all - neutral"): Was this because there really weren't any enjoyable things to look forward to, or because they were there but you couldn't really look forward to them?; "How happy did you feel?" (reverse-scored)). Higher score reflects higher levels of anhedonia (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life anhedonia measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Mean value of three daily diary items tapping into difficulties experiencing consummatory pleasure, anticipatory pleasure and motivational difficulties using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you find it difficult to enjoy yourself?"; "To what extent did you look forward to doing enjoyable things? (reverse-scored), "Conditional: if 0-50 ("not at all - neutral"): Was this because there really weren't any enjoyable things to look forward to, or because they were there but you couldn't really look forward to them?; "How happy did you feel?" (reverse-scored)). Higher score reflects higher levels of anhedonia (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life dampening measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Mean value of four daily life items to measure mental strategies to reduce the intensity and/or frequency of positive emotions, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you think, "This pleasant feeling won't last"?"; "To what extent did you think, "I don't deserve to feel good"?"; To what extent did you think, "Something might go wrong that will make my good/pleasant feeling go away"?; "To what extent did you think about how difficult it would be if your good/pleasant feeling suddenly disappeared?"). Higher score reflects higher levels of dampening (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life dampening measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Mean value of four daily life items to measure mental strategies to reduce the intensity and/or frequency of positive emotions, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you think, "This pleasant feeling won't last"?"; "To what extent did you think, "I don't deserve to feel good"?"; To what extent did you think, "Something might go wrong that will make my good/pleasant feeling go away"?; "To what extent did you think about how difficult it would be if your good/pleasant feeling suddenly disappeared?"). Higher score reflects higher levels of dampening (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life savoring measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Mean value of two daily life items tapping into the the engagement in attending to, appreciating and enhancing positive experiences, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you allow the good/pleasant feeling to be there and simply let it be?", "To what extent did you try to really focus your attention on the good/pleasant feeling in order to fully experience it and truly enjoy it?"). Higher scores reflect a higher tendency to savor (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life savoring measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Mean value of two daily diary items tapping into the the engagement in attending to, appreciating and enhancing positive experiences, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you allow the good/pleasant feeling to be there and simply let it be?", "To what extent did you try to really focus your attention on the good/pleasant feeling in order to fully experience it and truly enjoy it?"). Higher scores reflect a higher tendency to savor (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life emotional distress measured via daily diary items at post-training (derived from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Mean value of three daily diary items to measure anxiety, stress and depressed feelings, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "How anxious did you feel?"; "How depressed (down) did you feel?"; "How stressed did you feel?"). A higher score reflects higher levels of emotional distress (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life emotional distress measured via daily diary items at follow-up (derived from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Mean value of three daily diary items to measure anxiety, stress and depressed feelings, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "How anxious did you feel?"; "How depressed (down) did you feel?"; "How stressed did you feel?"). A higher score reflects higher levels of emotional distress (min = 0, max = 100).
Measured: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Secondary outcomes (28)
Episodic future thinking features measured via the Episodic Future Thinking Test (EFT-T; Hallford et al., 2019), and single item rating scales per generated event at post-training
8 cue words in response to which a positive future event is generated, accompanied with single-item rating scales ranging from 1 (not at all) to 9 (very much). In line with the study of Hallford, Yeow, et al. (2020), participants rate the index of detail (IoD), mental imagery (MI), anticipated (AdP) and anticipatory pleasure (AyP), and perceived control (PC) and perceived likelihood of occurrence (PLO) associated with the generated future events on the EFT-T. Higher scores reflect higher levels of the feature of interest (min = 8; max = 72).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Episodic future thinking features measured via the Episodic Future Thinking Test (EFT-T; Hallford et al., 2019), and single item rating scales per generated event at follow-up
8 cue words in response to which a positive future event is generated, accompanied with single-item rating scales ranging from 1 (not at all) to 9 (very much). In line with the study of Hallford, Yeow, et al. (2020), participants rate the index of detail (IoD), mental imagery (MI), anticipated (AdP) and anticipatory pleasure (AyP), and perceived control (PC) and perceived likelihood of occurrence (PLO) associated with the generated future events on the EFT-T. Higher scores reflect higher levels of the feature of interest (min = 8; max = 72).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Autobiographical memory features measured via the Autobiographical Memory (AM) Test (AMT; Raes, Williams, & Hermans, 2009) and single item rating scales per generated event at post-training
8 cue words in response to which a positive past event is recalled, accompanied with single-item rating scales ranging from 1 (not at all) to 9 (very much). Participants rate the index of detail (IoD), mental imagery (MI), felt and remembered pleasure (FP and RP), associated with the recalled past events on the AMT. Higher scores reflect higher levels of the feature of interest (min = 8; max = 72).
Measured: Measured via self-report scales immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Autobiographical memory features measured via the Autobiographical Memory (AM) Test (AMT; Raes, Williams, & Hermans, 2009) and single item rating scales per generated event at follow-up
8 cue words in response to which a positive past event is recalled, accompanied with single-item rating scales ranging from 1 (not at all) to 9 (very much). Participants rate the index of detail (IoD), mental imagery (MI), felt and remembered pleasure (FP and RP), associated with the recalled past events on the AMT. Higher scores reflect higher levels of the feature of interest (min = 8; max = 72).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Positive Affect subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Scales (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988) at post-training
Positive affect will be assessed via the Positive Affect subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Scales (PANAS; Engelen et al., 2006; Watson et al., 1988). The extent to which 10 positive feelings (e.g., "enthusiastic") were experienced is rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (rarely) to 5 (very often), with higher scores reflecting higher positive affect (min = 10, max = 50).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Positive Affect subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Scales (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988) at follow-up
Positive affect will be assessed via the Positive Affect subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Scales (PANAS; Engelen et al., 2006; Watson et al., 1988). The extent to which 10 positive feelings (e.g., "enthusiastic") were experienced is rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (rarely) to 5 (very often), with higher scores reflecting higher positive affect (min = 10, max = 50).
Measured: Measured via self-report scales after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Leuven Anhedonia Scale (LASS, 2nd version; Nelis et al., 2018) at post-training
12 items rated on a 1-5 Likert scale (1 = "This is completely incorrect for me.", 5 = "This is completely correct to me"). A higher total score reflects higher levels of anhedonia (min = 12, max = 60).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Leuven Anhedonia Scale (LASS, 2nd version; Nelis et al., 2018) at follow-up
12 items rated on a 1-5 Likert scale (1 = "This is completely incorrect for me.", 5 = "This is completely correct to me"). A higher total score reflects higher levels of anhedonia (min = 12, max = 60).
Measured: Measured via self-report scales after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Dampening measured via the Leuven Exeter Dampening Scale (LEDS, Bogaert et al., 2025) at post-training
The Leuven Exeter Dampening Scale (LEDS, Bogaert et al., 2025) consists of 13 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often). A higher score reflects a higher dampening tendency (min = 13, max = 65).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Dampening measured via the Leuven Exeter Dampening Scale (LEDS, Bogaert et al., 2025) at follow-up
The Leuven Exeter Dampening Scale (LEDS, Bogaert et al., 2025) consists of 13 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often). A higher score reflects a higher dampening tendency (min = 13, max = 65).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Savoring measured via the Savoring Subscale of the Four-Factor Model of the Abridged Ways Of Savoring Checklist (WOSC) in Response to Everyday Events (Original scale Bryant and Vernoff, 2007; Four-Factor Model Chadwick, 2012) at post-training
The 10 savoring items of the abridged Ways of Savoring Checklist for Adolescents (not yet validated in Dutch) taps into diverse savoring strategies (WOSC; Chadwick, 2012). Items (e.g., "I looked for other people to share it with") are rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). Higher scores reflect higher levels of engagement in the respective emotion regulation strategy (min = 10, max = 70).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Savoring measured via the Savoring Subscale of the Four-Factor Model of the Abridged Ways Of Savoring Checklist (WOSC) in Response to Everyday Events (Original scale Bryant and Vernoff, 2007; Four-Factor Model Chadwick, 2012) at follow-up
The 10 savoring items of the abridged Ways of Savoring Checklist for Adolescents (not yet validated in Dutch) taps into diverse savoring strategies (WOSC; Chadwick, 2012). Items (e.g., "I looked for other people to share it with") are rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). Higher scores reflect higher levels of engagement in the respective emotion regulation strategy (min = 10, max = 70).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) at post-training
21 items, rated on a 0-3 Likert scale (0 = "Not at all applicable", 3 = "Almost always applicable"). Higher total (subscale) scores reflect higher levels of emotional distress (depressive symptoms, anxious symptoms and stress; min = 0, max = 63).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) at follow-up
21 items, rated on a 0-3 Likert scale (0 = "Not at all applicable", 3 = "Almost always applicable"). Higher total (subscale) scores reflect higher levels of emotional distress (depressive symptoms, anxious symptoms and stress; min = 0, max = 63).
Measured: Measured via self-report scales after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Resilience assessed via the short version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Campbell-Sills & Stein, 2007; Connor & Davidson, 2003; translated into Dutch by Danhof-Pont & Schrier, 2006, 2010) at post-training
Statements of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (10 items; e.g., "I am able to adapt to change") are rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often), with higher scores reflecting higher levels of resilience (min = 10, max = 50).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life resilience (general) measured via daily diary item at post-training
Daily diary item rated on a 0-100 Likert (0 = not at all; 100 = a lot), with higher scores reflecting higher daily-life resilience (item: "To what extent did you feel that you were able to handle many things at the same time?", adapted from Martinez-Corts et al., 2015).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress) measured via daily diary item at post-training
Daily diary item rated on a 0-100 Likert (0 = not at all; 100 = a lot), with higher scores reflecting higher daily-life resilience (item: "To what extent were you able to cope easily with those feelings of stress?", adapted from Brogly et al., 2024).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress, using positive emotions) measured via daily diary item at post-training
Daily diary item rated on a 0-100 Likert (0 = not at all; 100 = a lot), with higher scores reflecting higher daily-life resilience (item: "To what extent did you try to think of something pleasant from the past or the future to cope with that stress?", new item).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Resilience assessed via the short version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Campbell-Sills & Stein, 2007; Connor & Davidson, 2003; translated into Dutch by Danhof-Pont & Schrier, 2006, 2010) at follow-up
Statements of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (10 items; e.g., "I am able to adapt to change") are rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often), with higher scores reflecting higher levels of resilience (min = 10, max = 50).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life resilience (general) measured via daily diary item at follow-up
Daily diary item rated on a 0-100 Likert (0 = not at all; 100 = a lot), with higher scores reflecting higher daily-life resilience (item: "To what extent did you feel that you were able to handle many things at the same time?", adapted from Martinez-Corts et al., 2015).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress) measured via daily diary item at follow-up
Daily diary item rated on a 0-100 Likert (0 = not at all; 100 = a lot), with higher scores reflecting higher daily-life resilience (item: "To what extent were you able to cope easily with those feelings of stress?", adapted from Brogly et al., 2024).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress, using positive emotions) measured via daily diary item at follow-up
Daily diary item rated on a 0-100 Likert (0 = not at all; 100 = a lot), with higher scores reflecting higher daily-life resilience (item: "To what extent did you try to think of something pleasant from the past or the future to cope with that stress?", new item).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mental wellbeing measured via the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS; Ikink et al., 2012; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) at post-training
This self-report scale comprises 7 statements (e.g., "I have been feeling relaxed") rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Higher scores indicate higher self-reported wellbeing (min = 7, max =35).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mental wellbeing measured via the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS; Ikink et al., 2012; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) at follow-up
This self-report scale comprises 7 statements (e.g., "I have been feeling relaxed") rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Higher scores indicate higher self-reported wellbeing (min = 7, max =35).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Persistent negative thinking measured via the Persistent and Intrusive Negative Thoughts Scale (PINTS; Magson et al., 2019; 5 items) at post-training
This is a 5-item scale measuring the core characteristics of repetitive negative thinking (Magson et al., 2019). The items are answered on a 5-point frequency scale ranging from never (1) to almost always (5). A higher score reflect higher levels of persisitent negative thinking (min = 5, max = 25).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Persistent negative thinking measured via the Persistent and Intrusive Negative Thoughts Scale (PINTS; Magson et al., 2019; 5 items) at follow-up
This is a 5-item scale measuring the core characteristics of repetitive negative thinking (Magson et al., 2019). The items are answered on a 5-point frequency scale ranging from never (1) to almost always (5). A higher score reflect higher levels of persisitent negative thinking (min = 5, max = 25).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Common humanity measured via the "Samen mens zijn" scale (Raes & Bogaert, 2025; unpublished) at post-training
Self-report scale consisting of 5 items (e.g., "When I go through difficult things, I realize that others also experience tough moments sometimes, just like I do."), rated on a Likertscale from 1 (never or almost never) to 5 (almost always). A higher score reflects higher levels of common humanity (min = 5, max = 25).
Measured: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the end of the baseline assessment)
Common humanity measured via the "Samen mens zijn" scale (Raes & Bogaert, 2025; unpublished) at follow-up
Self-report scale consisting of 5 items (e.g., "When I go through difficult things, I realize that others also experience tough moments sometimes, just like I do."), rated on a Likertscale from 1 (never or almost never) to 5 (almost always). A higher score reflects higher levels of common humanity (min = 5, max = 25).
Measured: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Dec 2025
- Study startOct 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completionDec 2027 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Emotional DistressStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 36 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- KU Leuven
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Research Foundation - Flanders (Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Filip Raes, KU Leuven
- Investigators
- Filip Raes, Principal investigator, KU Leuven
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07288541
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- G051625N
- Acronym
- iPET
- Status last verified
- Dec 2025
- First submitted
- 21 Nov 2025
- Last updated
- 22 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Data can only be accessed by the involved researchers. Anonymized data can be made available at the end of the study, in line with the data management plan and taking into account the faculties' requirements and ethical principles.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Promoting Positive Emotions in Adolescents Using Positive Event Training: An Indicated Approach (iPET)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07288541
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- iPET / G051625N
- Conditions
- Emotional Distress, Anhedonia
- Keywords
- positive emotions, anhedonia, positive affect regulation, emotional distress, autobiographical thinking
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 36 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- KU LeuvenUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Research Foundation - Flanders (Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek)
- Study start
- Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 17 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Research shows that high positive emotionality is an essential ingredient in building resilience in youngsters, especially those with a vulnerability to develop depressive symptomatology. It may empower them against actual depression and its various long-term adverse outcomes. One way to achieve positive emotions is via the recollection and anticipation of specific positive events. Therefore, to cultivate positive emotions in young people, a user-friendly group training program was developed, translated from basic research findings: Positive Event Training (PET). Through PET, adolescents learn to solidify positive memories and positive plans for the future. In this project, a comprehensive evaluation of PET's efficacy is conducted using a robust methodology with vulnerable youth.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Positive Events Training (PET) | Experimental | Behavioral: Positive Events Training (PET) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 12 to 16 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- 12-16 years (age)
- mild-severe level of baseline depressive symptoms Exclusion Criteria: /
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Positive Events Training (PET)Positive Event Training or PET is a group-based training program combining Memory Specificity Training (MEST; Raes, 2007) and Future Event Specificity Training (FEST; Dutch version of Hallford et al. (2020): Changing the Future: An initial test of Future Specificity Training). | Behavioural | Positive Events Training (PET) |
Primary outcome
Daily-life positive emotions measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Kirtley et al., 2022)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mean value of four daily diary items (i.e., "How relaxed, content, enthusiast, good do you feel?"), rated on a 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("a lot") rating scale. Higher values represent, higher levels of positive emotions (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life positive emotions measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Kirtley et al., 2022)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mean value of four daily diary items (i.e., "How relaxed, content, enthusiast, good do you feel?"), rated on a 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("a lot") rating scale. Higher values represent, higher levels of positive emotions (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life anhedonia measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mean value of three daily diary items tapping into difficulties experiencing consummatory pleasure, anticipatory pleasure and motivational difficulties using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you find it difficult to enjoy yourself?"; "To what extent did you look forward to doing enjoyable things? (reverse-scored), "Conditional: if 0-50 ("not at all - neutral"): Was this because there really weren't any enjoyable things to look forward to, or because they were there but you couldn't really look forward to them?; "How happy did you feel?" (reverse-scored)). Higher score reflects higher levels of anhedonia (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life anhedonia measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mean value of three daily diary items tapping into difficulties experiencing consummatory pleasure, anticipatory pleasure and motivational difficulties using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you find it difficult to enjoy yourself?"; "To what extent did you look forward to doing enjoyable things? (reverse-scored), "Conditional: if 0-50 ("not at all - neutral"): Was this because there really weren't any enjoyable things to look forward to, or because they were there but you couldn't really look forward to them?; "How happy did you feel?" (reverse-scored)). Higher score reflects higher levels of anhedonia (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life dampening measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mean value of four daily life items to measure mental strategies to reduce the intensity and/or frequency of positive emotions, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you think, "This pleasant feeling won't last"?"; "To what extent did you think, "I don't deserve to feel good"?"; To what extent did you think, "Something might go wrong that will make my good/pleasant feeling go away"?; "To what extent did you think about how difficult it would be if your good/pleasant feeling suddenly disappeared?"). Higher score reflects higher levels of dampening (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life dampening measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mean value of four daily life items to measure mental strategies to reduce the intensity and/or frequency of positive emotions, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you think, "This pleasant feeling won't last"?"; "To what extent did you think, "I don't deserve to feel good"?"; To what extent did you think, "Something might go wrong that will make my good/pleasant feeling go away"?; "To what extent did you think about how difficult it would be if your good/pleasant feeling suddenly disappeared?"). Higher score reflects higher levels of dampening (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life savoring measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mean value of two daily life items tapping into the the engagement in attending to, appreciating and enhancing positive experiences, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you allow the good/pleasant feeling to be there and simply let it be?", "To what extent did you try to really focus your attention on the good/pleasant feeling in order to fully experience it and truly enjoy it?"). Higher scores reflect a higher tendency to savor (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life savoring measured via daily diary items at follow-up (adapted from Gérardy et al., in preparation; simplified to better fit target group of adolescents)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mean value of two daily diary items tapping into the the engagement in attending to, appreciating and enhancing positive experiences, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "To what extent did you allow the good/pleasant feeling to be there and simply let it be?", "To what extent did you try to really focus your attention on the good/pleasant feeling in order to fully experience it and truly enjoy it?"). Higher scores reflect a higher tendency to savor (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life emotional distress measured via daily diary items at post-training (derived from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mean value of three daily diary items to measure anxiety, stress and depressed feelings, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "How anxious did you feel?"; "How depressed (down) did you feel?"; "How stressed did you feel?"). A higher score reflects higher levels of emotional distress (min = 0, max = 100).
Daily-life emotional distress measured via daily diary items at follow-up (derived from Bogaert et al., 2023)
Time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mean value of three daily diary items to measure anxiety, stress and depressed feelings, using a 0-100 Likert scale (0 = "not at all", 100 = "a lot"; items: "How anxious did you feel?"; "How depressed (down) did you feel?"; "How stressed did you feel?"). A higher score reflects higher levels of emotional distress (min = 0, max = 100).
28 secondary outcomes
Episodic future thinking features measured via the Episodic Future Thinking Test (EFT-T; Hallford et al., 2019), and single item rating scales per generated event at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Episodic future thinking features measured via the Episodic Future Thinking Test (EFT-T; Hallford et al., 2019), and single item rating scales per generated event at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Autobiographical memory features measured via the Autobiographical Memory (AM) Test (AMT; Raes, Williams, & Hermans, 2009) and single item rating scales per generated event at post-training
Time frame: Measured via self-report scales immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Autobiographical memory features measured via the Autobiographical Memory (AM) Test (AMT; Raes, Williams, & Hermans, 2009) and single item rating scales per generated event at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Positive Affect subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Scales (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Positive Affect subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Scales (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured via self-report scales after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Leuven Anhedonia Scale (LASS, 2nd version; Nelis et al., 2018) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Leuven Anhedonia Scale (LASS, 2nd version; Nelis et al., 2018) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured via self-report scales after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Dampening measured via the Leuven Exeter Dampening Scale (LEDS, Bogaert et al., 2025) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Dampening measured via the Leuven Exeter Dampening Scale (LEDS, Bogaert et al., 2025) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Savoring measured via the Savoring Subscale of the Four-Factor Model of the Abridged Ways Of Savoring Checklist (WOSC) in Response to Everyday Events (Original scale Bryant and Vernoff, 2007; Four-Factor Model Chadwick, 2012) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Savoring measured via the Savoring Subscale of the Four-Factor Model of the Abridged Ways Of Savoring Checklist (WOSC) in Response to Everyday Events (Original scale Bryant and Vernoff, 2007; Four-Factor Model Chadwick, 2012) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured via self-report scales after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Resilience assessed via the short version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Campbell-Sills & Stein, 2007; Connor & Davidson, 2003; translated into Dutch by Danhof-Pont & Schrier, 2006, 2010) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life resilience (general) measured via daily diary item at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress) measured via daily diary item at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress, using positive emotions) measured via daily diary item at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Resilience assessed via the short version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Campbell-Sills & Stein, 2007; Connor & Davidson, 2003; translated into Dutch by Danhof-Pont & Schrier, 2006, 2010) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life resilience (general) measured via daily diary item at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress) measured via daily diary item at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Daily-life resilience (in response to stress, using positive emotions) measured via daily diary item at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Mental wellbeing measured via the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS; Ikink et al., 2012; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Mental wellbeing measured via the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS; Ikink et al., 2012; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Persistent negative thinking measured via the Persistent and Intrusive Negative Thoughts Scale (PINTS; Magson et al., 2019; 5 items) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)
Persistent negative thinking measured via the Persistent and Intrusive Negative Thoughts Scale (PINTS; Magson et al., 2019; 5 items) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Common humanity measured via the "Samen mens zijn" scale (Raes & Bogaert, 2025; unpublished) at post-training
Time frame: Measured immediately after the end of the training (i.e., four weeks after the end of the baseline assessment)
Common humanity measured via the "Samen mens zijn" scale (Raes & Bogaert, 2025; unpublished) at follow-up
Time frame: Measured after two/three months of follow-up after the post-training assessment
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Data can only be accessed by the involved researchers. Anonymized data can be made available at the end of the study, in line with the data management plan and taking into account the faculties' requirements and ethical principles.
Related trials for Emotional Distress
Recruiting
Readiness and Progress in Emotion Regulation Therapy
Rumination, Worry
Enrolling by invitation
Indigenous Youth and Young Adults With Diabetes Peer Mentorship Program
Diabetes Mellitus, Distress, Emotional
Recruiting
Supportive Psychoeducational Intervention for Patients With Brain Tumors (Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based Supportive Intervention for Patients With Central Nervous System Tumors)
Malignant Brain Tumor, Glioma
Recruiting
Mind-body Resilience Program for Cardiac Arrest Survivors and Their Caregivers: Recovering Together After Cardiac Arrest
Emotional Distress, Cardiac Arrest (CA)
Recruiting
Mindfulness Intervention for Emotional Distress (MIED) in Patients With GERD
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Emotional Distress
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Liesbeth Bogaert contact
Filip Raes principal investigator
KU Leuven
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Positive Events Training (PET) in people with Emotional Distress and Anhedonia, run by KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Oct 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Filip Raes (+32 16 32 58 92, filip.raes@kuleuven.be), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Daily-life positive emotions measured via daily diary items at post-training (adapted from Kirtley et al., 2022) (time frame: Measured via nine days of daily diaries (2x/day) immediately after the training (i.e., four weeks after the baseline assessment)). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Oct 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 26 Oct 2026.