ArticlePloS one2024
The efficacy of virtual reality in adults during puncture biopsy: A protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Influence of FPGS rs1544105 and GGH rs3758149 Gene Polymorphisms on Methotrexate Pharmacogenetics.Biochemical genetics · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPuncture biopsy is a primary method for obtaining tissue or cell samples from tumors for histopathological diagnosis. However, patients often experience pain, anxiety, and discomfort during the procedure. Virtual reality is a novel technology developed through advancements in computer skill, and it is utilized in healthcare as a cognitive approach to relieve pain and relaxation. However, there is controversy in published trials regarding the efficacy of virtual reality in adults during puncture biopsy. Therefore, a synthesis of objective and accurate data is needed to support the efficacy of virtual reality for pain relief during puncture biopsy in adults. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: To identify suitable randomized controlled trials, published literature in eight electronic databases will be searched, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, EMBASE, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan-fang Data, and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM). The collected data will be consolidated and subjected to meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.4. Mean difference will describe the continuous variables. 95% confidence intervals (CI) will characterize the interval estimates. Model categories will be selected based on heterogeneity. The quality of the inclusion of randomized controlled trials in terms of methodological quality will be assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Additionally, strength and certainty of the evidence will be assessed by the GRADE system. DISCUSSION: The following protocol delineates the fundamental process and methodology to be employed in a systematic review and meta-analysis of data pertaining to the efficacy of virtual reality in the context of adult puncture biopsy. The results of the study will furnish healthcare professionals with evidence-based clinical evidence, thereby facilitating sound clinical decision-making and yielding beneficial consequences for the clinical domain.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42024539303.
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.