ReviewCampbell systematic reviews2026
Effectiveness of Virtual Reality in Supporting Informal Caregivers: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Campbell systematic reviews, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: to synthesize the existing evidence on the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) interventions in supporting informal caregivers across outcomes including caregiver burden, stress, depression, anxiety, quality of life, self-efficacy, and skills acquisition. The review will compare VR interventions to usual care, waitlist control, or active control conditions. Eligible study designs include randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and pre-post studies published in English. A comprehensive search strategy will be implemented across multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, CENTRAL via the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, and Scopus) from inception to June 2026, supplemented by searches of gray literature, clinical trial registries, and reference lists. The review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (Registration Number: CRD42025634474). Covidence software will be used for screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 (RoB 2) for randomized controlled trials and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for non-randomized studies. If appropriate, a meta-analysis will be conducted using random-effects models, and the certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. The findings will inform future research and practice regarding VR-based caregiver support.
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.