An Immersive and Interactive Platform for Cognitive Assessment and Rehabilitation (bWell): Design and Iterative Development Process (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immersive technologies like virtual reality can enable clinical care that meaningfully aligns with real-world deficits in cognitive functioning. However, options in immersive 3D environments are limited, partly because of the unique challenges presented by the development of a clinical care platform. These challenges include selecting clinically relevant features, enabling tasks that capture the full breadth of deficits, ensuring longevity in a rapidly changing technology landscape, and performing the extensive technical and clinical validation required for digital interventions. Complicating development, is the need to integrate recommendations from domain experts at all stages. OBJECTIVE The Cognitive Health Technologies team at the National Research Council Canada aims to overcome these challenges with an iterative process for the development of bWell, a cognitive care platform providing multisensory cognitive tasks for adoption by treatment providers. METHODS The team harnessed the affordances of immersive technologies while taking an interdisciplinary research and developmental approach, obtaining active input from domain experts with iterative deliveries of the platform. The process made use of technology readiness levels, agile software development, and human-centered design to advance four main activities: identification of basic requirements and key differentiators, prototype design and foundational research to implement components, testing and validation in lab settings, and recruitment of external clinical partners. RESULTS bWell was implemented according to the findings from the design process. The main features of bWell include multimodal (fully, semi, or nonimmersive) and multiplatform (extended reality, mobile, and PC) implementation, configurable exercises that pair standardized assessment with adaptive and gamified variants for therapy, a therapist-facing user interface for task administration and dosing, and automated activity data logging. bWell has been designed to serve as a broadly applicable toolkit, targeting general aspects of cognition that are commonly impacted across many disorders, rather than focusing on 1 disorder or a specific cognitive domain. It comprises 8 exercises targeting different domains: states of attention (Egg), visual working memory (Theater), relaxation (Tent), inhibition and cognitive control (Mole), multitasking (Lab), self-regulation (Butterfly), sustained attention (Stroll), and visual search (Cloud). The prototype was tested and validated with healthy adults in a laboratory environment. In addition, a cognitive care network (5 sites across Canada and 1 in Japan) was established, enabling access to domain expertise and providing iterative input throughout the development process. CONCLUSIONS Implementing an interdisciplinary and iterative approach considering technology maturity brought important considerations for the development of bWell. Altogether, this harnesses the affordances of immersive technology and design for a broad range of applications, and for use in both cognitive assessment and rehabilitation. The technology has attained a maturity level of prototype implementation with preliminary validation carried out in laboratory settings, with next steps to perform the validation required for its eventual adoption as a clinical tool.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.008 |
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".