MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105722768 · doi:10.1302/1863-2548.14.200090

The use of virtual reality in reducing anxiety during cast removal: A randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3105722768 on OpenAlex
Bejaan A. Jivraj, Emily K. Schaeffer, Jeffrey N. Bone, Chelsea Stunden, Eva Habib, John Jacob, Kishore Mulpuri

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Children s Orthopaedics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyDistractionNauseaRandomized controlled trialVirtual realityPhysical therapyMedicineVirtual Reality Exposure TherapyPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)PsychologyClinical psychologyAnesthesiaPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: While virtual reality (VR) has been shown to be an effective distractor in children across a range of procedures, no studies have looked at its use within paediatric orthopaedics. The purpose of this study was to look at the use of VR in reducing anxiety levels in children during cast removal. In addition, the study aimed to find ways to enhance the efficiency of future VR trials in paediatrics. METHODS: A non-blinded randomized control trial took place in children aged four to 18 years. Intraprocedural anxiety was measured using the Children's Emotional Manifestation Scale (CEMS), while pre- and post-procedural anxiety was measured using the Short State Anxiety Inventory Scale. Additional data was collected on trait anxiety, nausea levels, desire for future VR use and areas of improvement for future VR studies. RESULTS: A total of 90 subjects were included in the study (control n = 45, intervention n = 45) with a mean age of 10.25 years (sd 3.35). Post-procedural anxiety and intraprocedural anxiety were 18% (p = 0.03) and 24% (p = 0.01) lower in the VR group, respectively, with the CEMS facial component showing a 31% (p < 0.001) reduction in the VR group. In all, 99% (n = 89) of subjects experienced no nausea, with one patient experiencing mild nausea that may have been present prior to VR use. Finally, 90% (n = 81) of subjects said they would like to use VR again, 1% (n = 1) said 'no' and 9% (n = 8) said 'maybe'. CONCLUSION: VR appears to be an effective distraction technique in reducing anxiety levels in children during cast removal.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.250 · 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