ArticleJournal of audiology & otology2025
Novel Approach to the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire.
Article in Journal of audiology & otology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Rehabilitation Following Ultrasound-Guided Injection for Chronic Rotator Cuff Injury: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Differentiating Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness from Anxiety Disorder Using Behavioral Responses to Complex Visual Environments.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Immersive Virtual Reality for Stroke Rehabilitation: Linking Clinical and Digital Measures of Motor Recovery-A Pilot Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A preliminary comparison of bellringer performance across three visual modalities for the assessment of anatomy knowledge.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesVirtual reality (VR) applications change the perception of reality, resulting in a feeling of being in a natural environment. The occurrence of cybersickness (CS) when using VR applications is a well-documented side effect, and the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) has been used to assess CS. Considering the speed of VR technology development, CS will likely become a frequently researched and discussed topics in the near future. Therefore, the aim of this study was to conduct a Turkish validity and reliability study and introduce the SSQ to Turkish medical literature. Materials and.
methodsA total of 160 healthy individuals (80 females and 80 males) aged >18 years (28.4±7.2 years) were included in our study. The SSQ was provided to the participants through Google Forms before and after the VR provocation experience and within the scope of the test and retest protocol.
resultsThe reliability and internal consistency of the questionnaire were observed at a high level (Cronbach's alpha=0.854, Spearman-Brown coefficient r=0.871). Factor analysis was performed and the questionnaire was divided into three subfactors, consistent with the original questionnaire. In the responses obtained from the participants before and after VR provocation, statistically significant differences were observed in 13 of the 16 items in the questionnaire that are related to VR provocation (p<0.05). Statistically, the differences in fatigue, dizziness, and vertigo were greater in females than in males (p<0.05).
conclusionsThe Turkish version of the SSQ is an effective tool for measuring the side effects in VR environments. The inclusion of the SSQ in the Turkish literature enables the inclusion of non-English-speaking participants in research, especially for disciplines that consider peripheral and central vestibular disorders.
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.