Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37449058›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2023

Usability and acceptability of virtual reality for chronic pain management among diverse patients in a safety-net setting: a qualitative analysis.

Marika Dy, Kristan Olazo, Courtney R Lyles, Sarah Lisker, Jessica Weinberg, Christine Lee, Michelle E Tarver, Anindita Saha, Kimberly Kontson, Richardae Araojo and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marika DyDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Kristan OlazoDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Courtney R LylesDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1111-8595
Sarah LiskerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Jessica WeinbergCenter for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Christine LeeOffice of Minority Health and Health Equity, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Michelle E TarverCenter for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Anindita SahaCenter for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Kimberly KontsonCenter for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Richardae AraojoOffice of Minority Health and Health Equity, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Ellenor BrownCenter for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Urmimala SarkarDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4213-4405
United States Food and Drug Administration · USSan Francisco General Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to understand the usability and acceptability of virtual reality (VR) among a racially and ethnically diverse group of patients who experience chronic pain. Materials and Methods: Using the Technology Acceptance Model theory, we conducted semistructured interviews and direct observation of VR use with English-speaking patients who experience chronic pain treated in a public healthcare system ( Results: Before the study, none of the 15 participants had heard about or used VR for pain management. Common motivators for VR use included a previous history of substance use and having exhausted many other options to manage their pain and curiosity. Most participants had a positive experience with VR and 47% found that the VR modules distracted them from their pain. When attempting the navigation-based usability tasks, most participants (73%-92%) were able to complete them independently. Discussion: VR is a usable tool for diverse patients with chronic pain. Our findings suggest that the usability of VR is not a barrier and perhaps a focus on improving the Conclusions: The usability and acceptability of VR are rarely studied in diverse patient populations. We found that participants had a positive experience using VR, showed interest in future use, and would recommend VR to family and friends.

Indexed as

implementation scienceinformation technologymedical informaticsqualitative researchvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID37449058
PMCPMC10336187
OpenAlexW4383874767

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.