Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38524197›Full record

ReviewPatient preference and adherence2024

Advocating for Action: Exploring the Potential of Virtual Reality in Breathing Exercise - A Review of The Clinical Applications.

Saad A Alhammad

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. 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

1 author.

Saad A AlhammadDepartment of Rehabilitation Health Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-9591-5649

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emergence of virtual reality (VR) technologies is currently shaping the healthcare system and is now being employed in various healthcare interventions. Pulmonary rehabilitation remains one such area in which VR is currently thriving to ensure overall health and well-being. While the importance of these novel technologies is being primarily researched in pulmonary rehabilitation, especially over passive conventional breathing exercise training, there seems to be a limited number of studies that have comprehensively put together these findings. This study utilizes a scoping review methodology to review VR exercises in clinical settings related to pulmonary rehabilitation. To achieve this objective, three electronic databases (Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library) were searched using a formulated search string related to the research objective. Following the database search, a total of 236 references were retrieved and managed using the reference manager. The screening of references was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 screening process, and their quality was assessed using the JBI checklist. Ultimately, a total of eight publications of high quality were selected for inclusion in the scoping review. The results of the synthesis validate the importance of utilizing VR in the context of breathing exercise in rehabilitation. The effectiveness and rapid development of VR breathing exercises are primarily attributed to the engaging and immersive experience they provide. The use of biofeedback and self-regulation techniques into VR exercise systems was also seen to have a notable impact on the effectiveness of the breathing exercise system.

Indexed as

biofeedbackbreathing exerciseCOPDpulmonary rehabilitationrespiratory ratevirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID38524197
PMCPMC10960537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.