ReviewInternational journal of nursing sciences2026
The use of virtual reality in cancer patient health education: A scoping review.
Review in International journal of nursing sciences, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This scoping review aimed to identify and summarize the current research on virtual reality (VR) technologies used for health education in cancer patients, as well as to identify key areas of application. Methods: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was performed across 11 electronic databases and gray literature sources from inception to 12 September 2025. Studies employing immersive VR tools to improve health education outcomes in cancer patients were included. Data extraction and thematic synthesis were conducted to map evidence regarding VR modalities, educational applications, and outcome measures. Results: Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. VR was applied across four primary educational scenarios, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery, and healthy behavior (including rehabilitation, smoking cessation, and self-management). Eight distinct VR modalities were identified, namely VR videos, virtual environments, virtual environment for radiotherapy training (VERT), VR interactions, 3D models, VR games, VR non-player characters (VR NPCs), and virtual libraries. Among these, VR videos (50.0 %), virtual environments (46.4 %), and VR interactions (28.6 %) were the most frequently employed. The interventions led to significant improvements in patient knowledge, skills, attitudes, health behaviors, and psychological well-being. A clear evolution in VR educational approaches has been observed, shifting from static environmental familiarization toward interactive, gamified, and intelligence-driven experiences. Nevertheless, notable gaps remain regarding safety protocols and data privacy protections, with only a minority of studies addressing these issues. Conclusions: VR technologies demonstrate considerable promise as an innovative educational tool in oncology care, enhancing patient understanding, psychological preparedness, and engagement throughout the cancer journey. Future implementation must address infrastructural, ethical, and user-centered design barriers to facilitate the scalable and sustainable integration of this approach into clinical practice.
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.