ReviewDigital health
The effectiveness of virtual reality to improve depression: A systematic evidence map.
Review in Digital health. 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 reality in psychological interventions for mood disorders: a scoping review.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Immersive metaverse art as a psychological intervention for depression and anxiety: a narrative review and multilevel model integrating engagement, cultural identity, and neurocognitive mechanisms.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aims to systematically integrate the evidence based on meta-analysis of the efficacy of virtual reality on depressive symptoms in various populations. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP) from inception to December 31, 2024. This study used an evidence map approach to integrate the included meta-analyses, to assess the effectiveness of virtual reality in treating depression, and to explore the impact of different groups and intervention characteristics on efficacy. Results: A total of 27 meta-analyses were included, from which 33 outcomes were extracted for analysis. The quality assessment revealed that a significant majority of these outcomes (69.70%, 23/33) stemmed from MAs classified as low or critically low quality. The bubble chart indicated that the majority (75.8%, 25/33) supported the beneficial impact of virtual reality in improving depressive symptoms. These meta-analyses encompassed 129 independent original studies involving 6639 participants across multiple diverse populations. Positive effects were observed for populations with chronic non-neoplastic diseases, cancer, degenerative diseases, cognitive impairment, and those in special care scenarios. However, the effect on patients with mental and psychological disorders remains unclear. Conclusion: Virtual reality interventions represent a promising approach in improving depressive symptoms, particularly in settings where conventional therapies are difficult to implement. Future research should focus on accumulating high-quality evidence and encompass a broader range of individuals at high risk of depression to enhance the generalizability of virtual reality applications in managing depression.
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.