Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34803762›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2021

Arguing in Favor of Revising the

Stéphane Bouchard, Maxine Berthiaume, Geneviève Robillard, Hélène Forget, Camille Daudelin-Peltier, Patrice Renaud, Caroline Blais, Daniel Fiset

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stéphane BouchardDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Maxine BerthiaumeSchool of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Geneviève RobillardDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Hélène ForgetDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Camille Daudelin-PeltierDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Patrice RenaudDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Caroline BlaisDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Daniel FisetDépartement de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO), Gatineau, QC, Canada.
Université du Québec en Outaouais · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two issues are increasingly of interest in the scientific literature regarding unwanted virtual reality (VR) induced side effects: (1) whether the latent structure of the

Indexed as

anxietycybersicknesssimulator sicknesssimulator sickness questionnairetrier stress social testvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID34803762
PMCPMC8604025
OpenAlexW3214019248

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.