Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36189005›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022

Actual vs. perceived exertion during active virtual reality game exercise.

Trenton H Stewart, Kirsten Villaneuva, Amanda Hahn, Julissa Ortiz-Delatorre, Chandler Wolf, Randy Nguyen, Nicole D Bolter, Marialice Kern, James R Bagley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

9 authors.

Trenton H StewartExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Kirsten VillaneuvaExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Amanda HahnExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Julissa Ortiz-DelatorreExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Chandler WolfExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Randy NguyenExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Nicole D BolterExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Marialice KernExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
James R BagleyExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Virtual exercise has become more common as emerging and converging technologies make active virtual reality games (AVRGs) a viable mode of exercise for health and fitness. Our lab has previously shown that AVRGs can elicit moderate to vigorous exercise intensities that meet recommended health benefit guidelines. Dissociative attentional focuses during AVRG gameplay have the potential to widen the gap between participants' perception of exertion and actual exertion. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine actual exertion (AEx) vs. perceived exertion (PEx) levels during AVRGs by measuring heart rate (HR) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) in two different settings. Materials and methods: HR and RPE were collected on participants ( Results: Participants exhibited significantly higher levels of AEx compared to reported PEx for all three AVRGs (Intensity): FNVR [AEx = 11.6 ± 1.8 (Light), PEx = 9.0 ± 2.0 (Very Light)], BS [AEx = 11.3 ± 1.7 (Light), PEx = 10.3 ± 2.1 (Very Light)], HP [AEx = 13.1 ± 2.3 (Somewhat Hard), PEx = 12.3 ± 2.4 (Light-Somewhat Hard)]. Additionally, participants playing in the GymS experienced significantly higher levels of AEx [12.4 ± 2.3 (Light-Somewhat Hard)] and PEx [10.8 ± 2.5 (Very Light-Light)] compared to the LabS [AEx = 11.6 ± 1.8 (Light), PEx = 10.3 ± 2.6 (Very Light-Light)]. Conclusion: Perceptions of exertion may be lower than actual exertion during AVRG gameplay, and exertion levels can be influenced by the setting in which AVRGs are played. This may inform VR developers and health clinicians who aim to incorporate exercise/fitness regimens into upcoming 'virtual worlds' currently being developed at large scales (i.e., the "metaverse").

Indexed as

energy expenditureexercise intensityexergamesheart raterating of perceived exertionvideo games

Identifiers

PMID36189005
PMCPMC9397749

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.