Augmented Reality Exergames for Upcoming Cognitive-Motor Rehabilitation: User-Centered Design Approach and User Experience of Healthy Children
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Traditional rehabilitation programs for children with cerebral palsy and acquired brain injuries aim to enhance motor and cognitive abilities through repetitive exercises, which are often perceived as tedious and demotivating. Extended reality technologies, including augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality, offer more engaging methods through exergames. However, to date, no AR exergames simultaneously integrate cognitive and motor aspects within navigational tasks. Developing these exergames necessitates rigorous methodological steps, especially when using emerging technologies such as AR. The MIDE (Multidisciplinary Iterative Design of Exergames) framework advocates a participatory design approach, involving users from the outset, the objective being to optimize the interface and validate game mechanics through user experience (UX) assessment. Some researchers initially test these mechanisms on healthy children before applying them to clinical populations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the UX of our AR exergames, consisting of two games (AR Corsi and AR Zoo), in typically developing children. METHODS: Typically developing children participated in two 1.5-hour sessions. During each session, they played one of two AR games using the Microsoft HoloLens 2 headset: AR Corsi and AR Zoo, both of which are designed to engage executive functions and motor skills through navigational capabilities. UX was assessed after each session using the following measures: System Usability Scale scores for usability, AttrakDiff for attractiveness and game quality, MeCue for emotional experience, and Rating scale of Perceived Exertion for Children for pre- and postsession mental and physical fatigue. RESULTS: A total of 27 participants (mean age 11.9, SD 1.2 years) were included in the study. Mean System Usability Scale scores were 79.9 (SD 11.4) for AR Corsi and 76.3 (SD 12.1) for AR Zoo, indicating good usability. The AttrakDiff questionnaire yielded favorable results, with scores between 1 and 3 for overall attractiveness, pragmatic quality, and stimulation for both AR games. However, the hedonic quality "identity" received neutral scores (mean 0.6, SD 0.5 for AR Corsi and mean 0.7, SD 0.8 for AR Zoo). The MeCue emotions module yielded average scores of 5.2 (SD 0.7) for AR Corsi and 5.3 (SD 0.8) for AR Zoo, significantly exceeding the theoretical mean of 4 (P<.001). We observed a significant effect of physical fatigue (P=.02) and mental fatigue (P=.002) after exposure to both games. A comparative analysis of UX between the two games showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that our exergame, comprising two AR games, is user-friendly and well-received by typically developing children, eliciting positive emotions and overall appeal. Although some children reported fatigue, favorable UX evaluation confirms the validity of the game's content and mechanisms, suggesting its suitability for use among children with cerebral palsy and acquired brain injuries.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».