Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32322194›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2020

Usability Issues of Clinical and Research Applications of Virtual Reality in Older People: A Systematic Review.

Cosimo Tuena, Elisa Pedroli, Pietro Davide Trimarchi, Alessia Gallucci, Mattia Chiappini, Karine Goulene, Andrea Gaggioli, Giuseppe Riva, Fabrizia Lattanzio, Fabrizio Giunco and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 197 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Cosimo TuenaApplied Technology for Neuro-Psychology, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Elisa PedroliApplied Technology for Neuro-Psychology, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Pietro Davide TrimarchiIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Milan, Italy.
Alessia GallucciIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Milan, Italy.
Mattia ChiappiniApplied Technology for Neuro-Psychology, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Karine GouleneDepartment of Geriatrics and Cardiovascular Medicine, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Andrea GaggioliApplied Technology for Neuro-Psychology, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe RivaApplied Technology for Neuro-Psychology, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Fabrizia LattanzioScientific Direction, IRCCS INRCA, Ancona, Italy.
Fabrizio GiuncoIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Milan, Italy.
Marco Stramba-BadialeDepartment of Geriatrics and Cardiovascular Medicine, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano · ITDon Carlo Gnocchi Foundation · ITIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITUniversità degli Studi eCampus · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aging is a condition that may be characterized by a decline in physical, sensory, and mental capacities, while increased morbidity and multimorbidity may be associated with disability. A wide range of clinical conditions (e.g., frailty, mild cognitive impairment, metabolic syndrome) and age-related diseases (e.g., Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, cancer, sarcopenia, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases) affect older people. Virtual reality (VR) is a novel and promising tool for assessment and rehabilitation in older people. Usability is a crucial factor that must be considered when designing virtual systems for medicine. We conducted a systematic review with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines concerning the usability of VR clinical systems in aging and provided suggestions to structure usability piloting. Findings show that different populations of older people have been recruited to mainly assess usability of non-immersive VR, with particular attention paid to motor/physical rehabilitation. Mixed approach (qualitative and quantitative tools together) is the preferred methodology; technology acceptance models are the most applied theoretical frameworks, however senior adapted models are the best within this context. Despite minor interaction issues and bugs, virtual systems are rated as usable and feasible. We encourage usability and user experience pilot studies to ameliorate interaction and improve acceptance and use of VR clinical applications in older people with the aid of suggestions (VR-USOP) provided by our analysis.

Indexed as

agingassessmentrehabilitationusabilityuser-experiencevirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID32322194
PMCPMC7156831
OpenAlexW3014736783

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.