ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2021
Theoretical Rationale for Design of Tasks in a Virtual Reality-Based Exergame for Rehabilitation Purposes.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2021. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual reality games are playing a greater role in rehabilitation settings. Previously, commercial games have dominated, but increasingly, bespoke games for specific rehabilitation contexts are emerging. Choice and design of tasks for VR-games are still not always clear, however; some games are designed to motivate and engage players, not necessarily with the facilitation of specific movements as a goal. Other games are designed specifically for the facilitation of specific movements. A theoretical background for the choice of tasks seems warranted. As an example, we use a game that was designed in our lab: VR Walk. Here, the player walks on a treadmill while wearing a head-mounted display showing a custom-made virtual environment. Tasks include walking on a glass bridge across a drop, obstacle avoidance, narrowing path, walking in virtual footsteps, memory, and selection tasks, and throwing and catching objects. Each task is designed according to research and theory from movement science, exercise science, and cognitive science. In this article, we discuss how for example walking across a glass bridge gives perceptual challenges that may be suitable for certain medical conditions, such as hearing loss, when perceptual abilities are strained to compensate for the hearing loss. In another example, walking in virtual footsteps may be seen as a motor and biomechanical constraint, where the double support phase and base of support can be manipulated, making the task beneficial for falls prevention. In a third example, memory and selection tasks may challenge individuals that have cognitive impairments. We posit that these theoretical considerations may be helpful for the choice of tasks and for the design of virtual reality games.
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.