Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32079351›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Avoiding 3D Obstacles in Mixed Reality: Does It Differ from Negotiating Real Obstacles?

Bert Coolen, Peter J Beek, Daphne J Geerse, Melvyn Roerdink

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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 registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bert CoolenDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Peter J BeekDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Daphne J GeerseDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Melvyn RoerdinkDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mixed-reality technologies are evolving rapidly, allowing for gradually more realistic interaction with digital content while moving freely in real-world environments. In this study, we examined the suitability of the Microsoft HoloLens mixed-reality headset for creating locomotor interactions in real-world environments enriched with 3D holographic obstacles. In Experiment 1, we compared the obstacle-avoidance maneuvers of 12 participants stepping over either real or holographic obstacles of different heights and depths. Participants' avoidance maneuvers were recorded with three spatially and temporally integrated Kinect v2 sensors. Similar to real obstacles, holographic obstacles elicited obstacle-avoidance maneuvers that scaled with obstacle dimensions. However, with holographic obstacles, some participants showed dissimilar trail or lead foot obstacle-avoidance maneuvers compared to real obstacles: they either consistently failed to raise their trail foot or crossed the obstacle with extreme lead-foot margins. In Experiment 2, we examined the efficacy of mixed-reality video feedback in altering such dissimilar avoidance maneuvers. Participants quickly adjusted their trail-foot crossing height and gradually lowered extreme lead-foot crossing heights in the course of mixed-reality video feedback trials, and these improvements were largely retained in subsequent trials without feedback. Participant-specific differences in real and holographic obstacle avoidance notwithstanding, the present results suggest that 3D holographic obstacles supplemented with mixed-reality video feedback may be used for studying and perhaps also training 3D obstacle avoidance.

Indexed as

HoloLensmixed-reality headsetmixed-reality video feedbackobstacle avoidancewalking adaptability

Identifiers

PMID32079351
PMCPMC7071133
OpenAlexW3006654948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.