SynthesisArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
The effect of virtual reality on pregnant women and fetuses: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual, Augmented, Mixed, and Immersive Technologies for Prenatal and Childbirth Education: Scoping Review.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of an immersive virtual reality intervention to reduce anxiety during pregnancy: a quasiexperimental single-group pre-post study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveVirtual reality (VR), as a low-cost, non-invasive, and highly promising complementary therapeutic approach, has garnered increasing attention for its potential positive impacts on pregnant women, fetuses, and the childbirth process. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the specific effects of VR interventions on the psychological status, physiological indicators, and fetal outcomes of pregnant women.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP Database, SinoMed) up to July 2024. The RoB2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias, while the GRADE approach evaluated the certainty of the evidence. RevMan 5.4 was used for data analysis, including subgroup analyses, while meta-regression analyses were performed in Stata 16.0 to explore sources of heterogeneity. Additionally, TSA 0.9.5.10 Beta was utilized to determine the required information size (RIS) for assessing the credibility and conclusiveness of the evidence.
resultsA total of five randomized controlled trials involving 807 pregnant women were included in this meta-analysis. The findings revealed that VR interventions significantly reduced anxiety levels among pregnant women (MD = - 7.63, 95% CI [- 12.98, - 2.28], Z = 2.8, p = 0.005). Despite substantial heterogeneity observed (I
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that VR has significant advantages in optimizing the psychological and physiological states of pregnant women, but its direct impact on fetal heart rate is not significant. Further research is needed to explore the potential mechanisms of VR on fetal health, thereby comprehensively evaluating its clinical value as an adjunct to childbirth interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024561354.
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.