Neurological Evidence of Diverse Self-Help Breathing Training With Virtual Reality and Biofeedback Assistance: Extensive Exploration Study of Electroencephalography Markers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in virtual reality (VR) and biofeedback (BF) technologies have opened new avenues for breathing training. Breathing training has been suggested as an effective means for mental disorders, but it is difficult to master the technique at the beginning. VR-BF technologies address the problem of breathing, and visualizing breathing may facilitate the learning of breathing training. This study explores the integration of VR and BF to enhance user engagement in self-help breathing training, which is a multifaceted approach encompassing mindful breathing, guided breathing, and breath counting techniques. OBJECTIVE: We identified 3 common breathing training techniques in previous studies, namely mindful breathing, guided breathing, and breath counting. Despite the availability of diverse breathing training methods, their varying effectiveness and underlying neurological mechanisms remain insufficiently understood. We investigated using electroencephalography (EEG) indices across multiple breathing training modalities to address this gap. METHODS: Our automated VR-based breathing training environment incorporated real-time EEG, heart rate, and breath signal BF. We examined 4 distinct breathing training conditions (resting, mindful breathing, guided breathing, and breath counting) in a cross-sectional experiment involving 51 healthy young adults, who were recruited through online forum advertisements and billboard posters. In an experimental session, participants practiced resting state and each breathing training technique for 6 minutes. We then compared the neurological differences across the 4 conditions in terms of EEG band power and EEG effective connectivity outflow and inflow with repeated measures ANOVA and paired t tests. RESULTS: The analyses included the data of 51 participants. Notably, EEG band power across the theta, alpha, low-beta, high-beta, and gamma bands varied significantly over the entire scalp (t ≥1.96, P values <.05). Outflow analysis identified condition-specific variations in the delta, alpha, and gamma bands (P values <.05), while inflow analysis revealed significant differences across all frequency bands (P values <.05). Connectivity flow analysis highlighted the predominant influence of the right frontal, central, and parietal brain regions in the neurological mechanisms underlying the breathing training techniques. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides neurological evidence supporting the effectiveness of self-help breathing training through the combined use of VR and BF technologies. Our findings suggest the involvement of internal-external attention focus and the dorsal attention network in different breathing training conditions. There is a huge potential for the use of breathing training with VR-BF techniques in terms of clinical settings, the new living style since COVID-19, and the commercial value of introducing VR-BF breathing training into consumer-level digital products. Furthermore, we propose avenues for future research with an emphasis on the exploration of applications and the gamification potential in combined VR and BF breathing training. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06656741; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06656741.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».