ArticlePloS one2025
Best practices and practical strategies for co-designing virtual reality with Indigenous peoples: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Virtual reality (VR) is gaining traction in healthcare, education, and cultural sectors, from simulations in medical education to immersive museum experiences. Recently, VR has emerged as a powerful tool for Indigenous cultural preservation, language revitalization, and storytelling, offering immersive ways to safeguard knowledge and strengthen community connections. However, despite VR's potential to support Indigenous self-determination, little is known about the extent of Indigenous leadership, engagements, and settler-Indigenous collaborations in VR development. There is a critical need to examine how VR can be ethically and meaningfully co-designed with Indigenous communities to ensure cultural integrity, respect for Indigenous knowledge systems, and equitable participation in technological innovation. Thus, this scoping review aims to identify practical strategies and best practices for co-designing VR with Indigenous communities. In accordance with the JBI methodology, we will conduct a comprehensive search across seven electronic databases, including MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), Scopus, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Compendex (Engineering Village), and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global (ProQuest). Google Scholar will also be searched for grey literature sources. Eligible studies will focus on Indigenous populations (Population) and fully immersive VR co-design (Concept) across various contexts. Studies that do not discuss the design process will be excluded. Two independent reviewers will conduct literature screening, data extraction, and analysis, with findings synthesized narratively and presented in a structured charting table. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal publication and shared with relevant community partners to support knowledge translation and application.
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.