"Wii-Hab" in critically ill children: A pilot trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of virtual reality (VR) exercise as a novel acute rehabilitation intervention in a Pediatric Critical Care Unit (PCCU) setting. METHODS: Children aged 3-18 years with an anticipated PCCU stay > 48 hours, and baseline normal to moderate cognitive and functional disability were eligible. Exclusion criteria included: anticipated death, physical inability, or a contraindication to mobilization. Nintendo Wii™ Boxing was prescribed for a minimum of 10 minutes twice a day for 2 days. Primary outcomes were feasibility and safety. RESULTS: Of 21 eligible patients, 12 (57.1%) were enrolled and 8 completed the study. 41.7% (5/12) were males, and the median age was 11 (3,16) years. Four of the 8 participants who received the intervention were mechanically ventilated during Wii™ play. Participants used the Wii™ a median of 2 times (1,5) over the 2-day intervention period, for a median total duration of 54.5 (15, 224) minutes. There were no adverse events attributable to the intervention. Upper limb activity during Wii™ was significantly greater than the average daily activity (p=0.049). Grip strength did not change significantly from baseline (p=0.20). CONCLUSION: While the results of this pilot trial suggest that VR exercise may be safely applied in a subset of critically ill children, we observed several threats to its feasibility in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".