ArticleJournal of medical extended reality2024
Acceptance of Virtual Reality Among Adults with Rheumatologic Conditions.
Article in Journal of medical extended reality, 2024. 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.
- Assessing activity limitations experienced by persons with rheumatoid arthritis to inform appropriate selection of patient-reported outcomes measures: a qualitative study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Risk communication to patients with rheumatologic conditions is difficult. Virtual reality (VR) has demonstrated utility as a delivery mechanism for patient education, but user acceptance of this technology for applications such as communicating risks and benefits of health care interventions and medical treatments has been poorly studied. We aimed to assess the acceptability of VR as an educational tool among people with rheumatologic conditions and to compare acceptability among those who had used VR in the past to those who are VR naïve. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted, sampling two populations: members of an online patient-powered research network (registry) that included adults with rheumatologic conditions, and patients within a large U.S. community rheumatology practice-based research network. Survey items included patient demographic and clinical characteristics, prior VR experience, perceived usefulness for learning about their condition, anticipated enjoyment, and willingness to use VR to manage disease. A total of 3927 individuals completed the survey. Overall, 14.9% reported having prior experience using VR, and of these, 54.0% had used it only one to two times. Twenty-nine percent of participants agreed that VR would be useful for learning about their condition (25.4% of VR naïve, 49.0% of VR experienced [
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.