Immersive Virtual Reality Exergames for Persons Living With Dementia: User-Centered Design Study as a Multistakeholder Team During the COVID-19 Pandemic (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Advancements in supporting personalized health care and well-being using virtual reality (VR) have created opportunities to use immersive games to support a healthy lifestyle for persons living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Collaboratively designing exercise video games (exergames) as a multistakeholder team is fundamental to creating games that are attractive, effective, and accessible. OBJECTIVE This research extensively explores the use of human-centered design methods that involve persons living with dementia in long-term care facilitates, exercise professionals, content developers, game designers, and researchers in the creation of VR exergames targeting physical activity promotion for persons living with dementia/MCI. METHODS Conceptualization, collaborative design, and playtesting activities were carried out to design VR exergames to engage persons living with dementia in exercises to promote upper limb flexibility, strength, and aerobic endurance. We involved a total of 7 persons living with dementia/MCI, 5 exercise professionals, 5 community-dwelling older adults, a VR company for content creation, and a multidisciplinary research team with game designers, engineers, and kinesiology experts. RESULTS An immersive VR exergame called Seas the Day was jointly designed and developed and it is freely available to be played in state-of-the-art VR headsets (Oculus Quest 1, 2). A model for the triadic interaction (health care institution, industry partner, academia) is also presented to illustrate how different stakeholders contribute to the design of VR exergames that consider/complement complex needs, preferences, and motivators of an underrepresented group of end users. CONCLUSIONS This study provides evidence that a collaborative multistakeholder design results in more tailored and context-aware VR games for persons living with dementia. The insights and lessons learned from this research can be used by others to co-design games, including remote engagement techniques that were used during the COVID-19 pandemic.
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 | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".