STUDY PROTOCOL: EXPOSURE IN VIRTUAL REALITY FOR SOCIAL ANXIETY DISORDER - a randomized controlled superiority trial comparing cognitive behavioral therapy with virtual reality based exposure to cognitive behavioral therapy with in vivo exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) is characterized by an intense fear of negative judgement by others. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is recommended for treatment, but a substantial part of individuals with SAD either do not seek treatment or drop-out. CBT with Virtual Reality (VR)-based exposure has several advantages compared to traditional exposure methods, mainly due to increased control of situational elements. The aim of the current study is to develop a CBT program containing VR-based exposure. The intervention is targeted to adult patients suffering from SAD and treatment effect will be assessed by changes in SAD symptoms. METHODS: This article describes the study protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial with three arms: 1) CBT with VR exposure based on 360° videos 2) CBT with in vivo exposure and 3) VR relaxation therapy. There will be 30 participants in each arm with a crossover at the end of the treatment period during which the participants in the third group will be randomly re-allocated to one of the two former groups. The treatment program consists of 10 weekly individual sessions with a psychologist, and a six month follow-up consisting of a questionnaire. The primary outcome measure is reduction in SAD symptoms which will be assessed with the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS). DISCUSSION: There are currently no published studies on CBT with VR exposure based on 360° videos for SAD treatment. Furthermore, the current study will be the first Danish SAD treatment program that includes VR technology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03973541) June 3rd 2019.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".