ArticleResearch square2023
Therapist perspectives on telehealth-based virtual reality exposure therapy.
Article in Research square, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Virtual reality (VR) can enhance mental health care. In particular, the effectiveness of VR-based exposure therapy (VRET) has been well-demonstrated for treatment of anxiety disorders. However, most applications of VRET remain localized to clinic spaces. We aimed to explore mental health therapists' perceptions of telehealth-based VRET (tele-VRET) by conducting semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 18 telemental health therapists between October and December 2022. Interview topics included telehealth experiences, exposure therapy over telehealth, perceptions of VR in therapy, and perspectives on tele-VRET. Therapists described how telehealth reduced barriers (88.9%, 16/18), enhanced therapy (61.1%, 11/18), and improved access to clients (38.9%, 7/18), but entailed problems with technology (61.1%, 11/18), uncontrolled settings (55.6%, 10/18), and communication di culties (50%, 9/18). Therapists adapted exposure therapy to telehealth by using online resources (66.7%, 12/18), preparing client expectations (55.6%, 10/18), and adjusting workflows (27.8%, 5/18). Most therapists had used VR before (72.2%, 13/18) and had positive impressions (55.6%, 10/18), but none had used VR clinically. In response to tele-VRET, therapists requested interactive session activities (77.8%, 14/18) and customizable interventions components (55.6%, 10/18). Concerns about tele-VRET included risks with certain clients (77.8%, 14/18), costs (50%, 9/18), side effects and privacy (22.2%, 4/18), and inappropriateness for specific forms of exposure therapy (16.7%, 3/18). These results show how designing for telehealth may extend VRET and can help inform collaborative development of health technologies.
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.