Parental Voices on Virtual Reality in Pediatric Oncology: Experiences, Needs, and Pathways for Co-Design
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Pediatric cancer treatments significantly affect children’s physical, emotional, and social well-being. Virtual reality (VR) is emerging as a promising non-pharmacological tool to enhance quality of life during hospitalization, yet little is known about parents perceive its potential role in supportive care. Methods: This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with five parents of children in remission from cancer. It explored their experiences during chemotherapy and their perspectives on how VR could help support children and families during treatment. Results: Parents described multiple challenges during hospitalization, including emotional distress, physical side effects, social isolation, logistical difficulties, and communication issues. While most had limited prior exposure to VR, they expressed openness toward its use to reduce anxiety, boredom, and loneliness. Parents emphasized that VR should complement, not replace, human interaction, and suggested age-specific applications, interactive content for adolescent and calming, passive experiences for younger children. Discussion: This study provides novel insights by integrating parental voices early in the co-design process of VR interventions for pediatric oncology. It identifies concrete psychosocial needs and offers recommendations to ensure future digital tools are developmentally appropriate and family-centered. While the small, homogeneous sample and absence of child participants limit generalizability, the in-depth qualitative approach offers valuable groundwork for future participatory research and VR intervention development in pediatric cancer care. Plain Language Summary: When a child is hospitalized for cancer treatment, it can be a stressful experience for the entire family. Children often experience fear, loneliness, and pain. Their parents also face emotional and practical challenges, such as long hospital stays, lack of sleep, and concerns about their child’s well-being. In this study, we interviewed five parents whose children had undergone chemotherapy and were now in remission. We asked them to share what they went through during the treatment and how they feel about using virtual reality (VR) as a support tool for children during hospitalization. The parents described many difficulties their children faced: physical side effects, anxiety, boredom, and being cut off from school and friends. They also spoke about their own struggles, including emotional exhaustion and communication problems with hospital staff. Despite having little experience with VR, most parents were open to using it during treatment. They saw VR as a possible way to reduce anxiety, help children relax, and even keep in touch with friends. However, they were clear that VR should not replace human contact. Parents suggested ideas like calming virtual nature scenes for young children, or interactive games for teenagers. Their input helps us understand how to design VR tools that are both useful and acceptable for families. This study highlights the importance of involving parents in the development of new health technologies. By listening to their experiences, we can create better tools to support children with cancer and their families. Keywords: pediatric oncology, chemotherapy, parental experiences, virtual reality, supportive care, qualitative research, thematic analysis
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 | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».