MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039337668 · doi:10.1177/1362361320934214

Short report: Evaluating the safety and usability of head-mounted virtual reality compared to monitor-displayed video for children with autism spectrum disorder

2020· article· en· W3039337668 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsUsabilityVirtual realityAutism spectrum disorderAutismContext (archaeology)PsychologyOptical head-mounted displayPsychological interventionHuman–computer interactionApplied psychologyComputer scienceDevelopmental psychologyArtificial intelligencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality provides a relatively inexpensive way to learn and repeatedly practice skills in personalized, controlled, and safe computer-generated settings. These systems are increasingly receiving attention as an innovative medium for delivering interventions to children with autism spectrum disorder. Although many virtual reality systems are commercially available and their use is increasing, little is known about the safety and usability of these systems for children with autism spectrum disorder. The aim of this study was a first step in addressing this gap. A convenience sample of 35 children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder participated in an immersive head-mounted display virtual reality experience and a control condition (monitor-displayed video). Levels of anxiety and negative effects experienced were not significantly different between the two conditions. Participants reported significantly enhanced spatial presence (p = 0.003; d = 0.3) and naturalness (p = 0.002; d = 0.47) for the head-mounted display–virtual reality condition, and 74% of participants preferred using head-mounted display–virtual reality over monitor-displayed video. These findings provide preliminary evidence to support the safety and usability of head-mounted display–virtual reality for children with autism spectrum disorder. Future studies are needed to replicate the results in a larger sample, a range of virtual reality experiences, and in the context of long-term exposure. Lay abstract This study investigated the safety and usability of a virtual reality experience for children with autism spectrum disorder in a laboratory setting. In our study, the negative effects of head-mounted display–virtual reality were similar to monitor-displayed video watching. At the same time, the participants indicated that the head-mounted display–virtual reality experience provided improved realism and sense of presence. This study is a first step in understanding the impact of head-mounted display on children with autism spectrum disorder.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it