ArticleOpen research Europe2025
Mapping immersive digital tools in the ICT4Water Cluster: innovation, interoperability and impact.
Article in Open research Europe, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Immersive technologies-virtual, augmented, and mixed reality (XR)-are being piloted in the water sector for public engagement, training, and decision support. Within the European Commission's ICT4Water Cluster, multiple projects report XR tools, but comparable evidence on functionality, interoperability, and scalability is limited. Methods: We conducted a two-stage survey across ICT4Water projects (preliminary project-level screening: September-December 2023; tool-level assessment: April-May 2024). Responses were triangulated with public project materials. Seven distinct immersive solutions were analysed using a four-dimension rubric covering functionality, interoperability, scalability, and perceived impact. Results: The portfolio spans VR, AR, MR, decision-support dashboards, and public-facing installations. Reported deployment options include PCs (4/7; 57%) and smartphones (4/7; 57%), with online-only operation in 3/7 (43%) tools and offline capability in 2/7 (29%). Interoperability is uneven: 3/7 (43%) expose data integration or APIs, while 4/7 (57%) lack external interfaces. Evidence of scalability beyond single-site pilots is reported for 4/7 (57%) tools; 3/7 (43%) remain at pilot/proof-of-concept stage. Conclusions: XR can enhance awareness, learning, and operational insight, yet broader uptake depends on open interfaces, shared semantics, and post-project maintainability. We recommend designing against open standards and Smart Data Models, adopting modular packaging and open repositories to support post-project sustainment, and embedding XR within utility workflows and digital-twin initiatives to enable responsible scale-up.
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.