ArticlePatient preference and adherence2026
Integrating Positive Outcomes into Healthcare: Validation of the Pleasurable Affect Levels Scale.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As value-based healthcare (VBHC) continues to reshape global health systems, there is growing recognition that patient-reported outcomes should track not only disease but also positive factors like wellness. Despite the centrality of pleasure to motivation, resilience, and quality of life, no instruments directly assess this construct. To address this gap, the present study developed and preliminarily validated the Pleasurable Affect Levels Scale (PALS), a novel, generic patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) designed to quantify the experience of pleasure relevant for clinical decision making. Methods: A scoping literature review was conducted to identify validated scales measuring pleasure or related constructs and inform the novel scale development. Four iterative rounds of pilot testing were carried out. Item generation and refinement were guided by patient feedback, expert consensus, and psychometric testing. Analyses included exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to examine construct validity, item reduction based on cross-loadings and redundancy, and reliability assessment via Cronbach's alpha. Results: The literature review identified three validated scales (DARS, SAAS, SHAPS), each focused on anhedonia rather than pleasure itself. Final refinement across pilots yielded a final 23-item scale. Factor analysis supported a four-factor structure-functional maintenance, sensory input, social interaction, and leisure-with strong sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.941), significant Bartlett's test (p < 0.05), and excellent internal consistency (α = 0.942). Conclusion: Preliminary findings indicate strong psychometric performance. The assessment of pleasure could have important implications for clinical practice, research, and health policy by enabling clinicians to quantify and track patient health beyond symptom reduction, support treatment decisions, and potentially improve adherence. By incorporating pleasure into patient care and dialogue, it may promote a more comprehensive approach to healthcare, although these applications require validation through real-world clinical implementation and testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.