SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2026
Immersive Technologies for Cognitive Rehabilitation in Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Impact of Augmented Reality-Based Aromatherapy Education on Symptoms in Older Adults with Early-Stage Dementia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cognitive decline across the mild cognitive impairment (MCI)-dementia continuum is a major driver of loss of independence and growing health- and social-care burden. Immersive technologies, such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE) systems, are increasingly explored as tools to enhance engagement, personalization, and ecological validity in cognitive rehabilitation. Objective: This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the usability, therapeutic effects, and implementation challenges of immersive technologies for cognitive rehabilitation in MCI and dementia. Methods: A systematic search of Scopus and Web of Science was conducted for peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2021 and 2026. Eligible studies investigated VR, AR, or CAVE interventions targeting cognitive rehabilitation outcomes in MCI and/or dementia and reported measures related to usability or acceptability, or cognitive, functional, or behavioral outcomes. Due to heterogeneity in technologies, intervention content, and outcome measures, findings were synthesized narratively with comparisons across modalities and study designs. Results: In total, 119 studies met the inclusion criteria. Across immersive VR interventions, signals of benefit were most consistently reported for memory, attention, and executive functioning, with several studies also targeting outcomes with higher ecological relevance (eg, everyday task performance and functional skills). AR approaches primarily support context-aware cueing and task guidance in real-world settings, aiming to strengthen daily functioning and independence. CAVE-based systems were frequently used for spatial navigation and embodied interaction, offering advantages for supervised clinical deployment. Key barriers included cybersickness and comfort issues, interface complexity, and onboarding demands in cognitively impaired users, limited accessibility and standardization of outcome measures, small samples and short follow-up periods, and practical constraints related to cost, space, staffing, and caregiver involvement. Conclusions: Immersive VR, AR, and CAVE systems are feasible and often engaging for cognitive rehabilitation in MCI and dementia, with promising therapeutic signals but substantial uncertainty driven by methodological and implementation heterogeneity. Future work should prioritize standardized reporting (intervention components, dose, and adverse events), clinically meaningful outcomes (including functional end points), adequately powered comparative trials, and explicit evaluation of scalability and real-world deployment pathways.
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.