ArticleScientific reports2024
Experiments as Code and its application to VR studies in human-building interaction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Applying Augmented Reality to Convey Medical Knowledge on Osteoclasts to Users of a Serious Game: Vignette Experiment.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Experiments as Code (ExaC) is a concept for reproducible, auditable, debuggable, reusable, & scalable experiments. Experiments are a crucial tool to understand Human-Building Interactions (HBI) and build a coherent theory around it. However, a common concern for experiments is their auditability and reproducibility. Experiments are usually designed, provisioned, managed, and analyzed by diverse teams of specialists (e.g., researchers, technicians, engineers) and may require many resources (e.g., cloud infrastructure, specialized equipment). Although researchers strive to document experiments accurately, this process is often lacking. Consequently, it is difficult to reproduce these experiments. Moreover, when it is necessary to create a similar experiment, the "wheel is very often reinvented". It appears easier to start from scratch than trying to reuse existing work. Thus valuable embedded best practices and previous experiences are lost. In behavioral studies, such as in HBI, this has contributed to the reproducibility crisis. To tackle these challenges, we propose the ExaC paradigm, which not only documents the whole experiment, but additionally provides the automation code to provision, deploy, manage, and analyze the experiment. To this end, we define the ExaC concept, provide a taxonomy for the components of a practical implementation, and provide a proof of concept with an HBI desktop VR experiment that demonstrates the benefits of its "as code" representation, that is, reproducibility, auditability, debuggability, reusability, & scalability.
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.