Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36591050›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2022

Combining physical and virtual worlds for motor-cognitive training interventions: Position paper with guidelines on technology classification in movement-related research.

Luka Šlosar, Claudia Voelcker-Rehage, Armin H Paravlić, Ensar Abazovic, Eling D de Bruin, Uros Marusic

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Evidence-based yet still challenging! Research on physical activity in old age.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2023
    Article
  16. Review
  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

6 authors.

Luka ŠlosarScience and Research Centre Koper, Institute for Kinesiology Research, Koper, Slovenia.
Claudia Voelcker-RehageNeuromotor Behavior and Exercise, Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Armin H ParavlićScience and Research Centre Koper, Institute for Kinesiology Research, Koper, Slovenia.
Ensar AbazovicFaculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Eling D de BruinDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Uros MarusicScience and Research Centre Koper, Institute for Kinesiology Research, Koper, Slovenia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efficient movements require intact motor and cognitive function. There is a growing literature on motor-cognitive interventions to improve the overall quality of life of healthy or diseased older people. For such interventions, novel technological advances are crucial not only in terms of motivation but also to improve the user experience in a multi-stimuli world, usually offered as a mixture of real and virtual environments. This article provides a classification system for movement-related research dealing with motor-cognitive interventions performed in different extents of a virtual environment. The classification is divided into three categories: (a) type of digital device with the associated degree of immersiveness provided; (b) presence or absence of a human-computer interaction; and (c) activity engagement during training, defined by activity >1.5 Metabolic Equivalent of task. Since virtual reality (VR) often categorizes different technologies under the same term, we propose a taxonomy of digital devices ranging from computer monitors and projectors to head-mounted VR technology. All immersive technologies that have developed rapidly in recent years are grouped under the umbrella term Extended Reality (XR). These include augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), and VR, as well as all technologies that have yet to be developed. This technology has potential not only for gaming and entertainment, but also for research, motor-cognitive training programs, rehabilitation, telemedicine, etc. This position paper provides definitions, recommendations, and guidelines for future movement-related interventions based on digital devices, human-computer interactions, and physical engagement to use terms more consistently and contribute to a clearer understanding of their implications.

Indexed as

augmented realityclassificationexergamingextended realitymixed realitytaxonomyvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID36591050
PMCPMC9797127

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.