ArticlePloS one2024
A larger augmented-reality field of view improves interaction with nearby holographic objects.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Gait-modifying effects of augmented-reality cueing in people with Parkinson's disease.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Augmented-reality (AR) applications have shown potential for assisting and modulating gait in health-related fields, like AR cueing of foot-placement locations in people with Parkinson's disease. However, the size of the AR field of view (AR-FOV), which is smaller than one's own FOV, might affect interaction with nearby floor-based holographic objects. The study's primary objective was to evaluate the effect of AR-FOV size on the required head orientations for viewing and interacting with real-world and holographic floor-based objects during standstill and walking conditions. Secondary, we evaluated the effect of AR-FOV size on gait speed when interacting with real-world and holographic objects. Sixteen healthy middle-aged adults participated in two experiments wearing HoloLens 1 and 2 AR headsets that differ in AR-FOV size. To confirm participants' perceived differences in AR-FOV size, we examined the head orientations required for viewing nearby and far objects from a standstill position (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, we examined the effect of AR-FOV size on head orientations and gait speeds for negotiating 2D and 3D objects during walking. Less downward head orientation was required for looking at nearby holographic objects with HoloLens 2 than with HoloLens 1, as expected given differences in perceived AR-FOV size (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, a greater downward head orientation was observed for interacting with holographic objects compared to real-world objects, but again less so for HoloLens 2 than HoloLens 1 along the line of progression. Participants walked slightly but significantly slower when interacting with holographic objects compared to real-world objects, without any differences between the HoloLenses. To conclude, the increased size of the AR-FOV did not affect gait speed, but resulted in more real-world-like head orientations for seeing and picking up task-relevant information when interacting with floor-based holographic objects, improving the potential efficacy of AR cueing applications.
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.