MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3133137004 · doi:10.82308/42113

Validity of a virtual reality simulator for manual wheelchairs

2020· article· en· W3133137004 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fadi Chaar

Notice bibliographique

RevueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVirtual realitySimulationComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Given the risks involved with MW use, it is important to be able to gain the maneuvering and navigational skills in safe and controlled training environment. Training in a virtual reality (VR) setting allows for safe simulation of MW driving in a wide range of otherwise risky environments. In addition, it has been reported that the learned skills in a VR setting, can translate to real world scenarios, therefore allowing for skills improvement.The purpose of this thesis was to contribute evidence towards validating the usability and fidelity potential to which wheelchair skill training can be positively influenced by using a VR simulator, which provides realistic haptic feedback that mimics gravitational and inertial forces experienced during real propulsion. The first objective of this study was to validate the usability of the MiWe simulator by clinicians and expert MW users to, eventually, help improve wheelchair skills.The second objective was to determine whether or not haptic feedback would affect the overall experience by comparing the current study to a similar previous study done without haptic feedback. This thesis contains the results of an experiment that investigated the sense of presence, overall experience and ease of use of the experience. Sense of presence was broken down in four component that can be defined as level of involvement, experienced realism, spatial presence and overall presence. As for ease of use, it can be defined as level of ease faced when learning to operate and interact with the system, as well as the systems flexibility. Lastly, overall experience was assessed by a questionnaire and feedback on a multitude of factors such as comfort, control and level of difficulty experience.Our first hypothesis was that among clinicians and MW users, we would measure a positive view on ease of use and sense of presence during the MiWe simulator experience, and that there would be no difference between both groups. We were able to confirm this hypothesis with the results of the questionnaires and semi-structured interview. As for our second hypothesis, we hypothesized that the newer version of the simulator, which includes haptic feedback, would provide a more positive overall experience in comparison to our previous version with no haptic feedback. We were able to confirm that the inclusion of haptic feedback had a positive impact on overall experience. For this mixed method study, six MW users, as well as five expert clinicians in the field of wheeled mobility were recruited. They experienced a thirty minutes session in the McGill Wheelchair Simulator (MiWe) simulator. MW driving performance was assessed in MW users at baseline. After the experience in the MiWe simulator, three questionnaires were administered measuring sense of presence, ease of use and overall experience, as well as a semi-structured interview, to further investigate the overall experience. In terms of semi-structured interviews, the emerging themes were centered around technology adoption and branched into clinical usability and user experience. These findings intend to help rehabilitation professionals, who provide mobility-related services, to guide, alter and tailor their future mobility interventions according to their clients’ needs. To conclude, we were able to determine that among clinicians and MW users alike, there was a positive view on usability and sense of presence during the MiWe simulator experience, and that the addition of haptic feedback contributed significantly to the overall experience. The impact of our findings intends to help rehabilitation professionals, who provide mobility-related services, to guide, alter and tailor their future mobility interventions according to their clients’ needs

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,018
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,171
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,018
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,098

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0180,171
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,063
Tête enseignante GPT0,293
Écart entre enseignants0,230 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Même sujetVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsTravaux en français237 207