MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282934040 · doi:10.2196/32955

Immersive Virtual Reality Exergames to Promote the Well-being of Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Pilot Study

2022· article· en· W4282934040 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Samira Mehrabi, John Edison Muñoz, Aysha Basharat, Jennifer Boger, Shi Cao, Michael Barnett‐Cowan, Laura E. Middleton

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsHeadsetMoodVirtual realityUsabilityPsychologyCognitionApplied psychologyProtocol (science)PopulationIntervention (counseling)PerceptionSystem usability scalePhysical therapyMedicineClinical psychologyComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the proven benefits of exercise in older adults, challenges such as access and motivation can deter their engagement. Interactive virtual reality (VR) games combined with exercise (exergames) are a plausible strategy to encourage physical activity among this population. However, there has been little research on the feasibility, acceptability, and potential benefits of deploying at-home VR exergames among community-dwelling older adults. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study are to estimate the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of a co-designed VR exergame in community-dwelling older adults; examine intervention feasibility and assessment protocols for a future large-scale trial; and provide pilot data on outcomes of interest (physical activity, exercise self-efficacy, mood, cognition, perception, and gameplay metrics). METHODS: The study will be a remote, 6-week intervention comprising an experimental and a control group. A sample of at least 12 community-dwelling older adults (with no or mild cognitive impairment) will be recruited for each group. Both groups will follow the same study procedures and assessment methods. However, the experimental group will engage with a co-designed VR exergame (Seas The Day) thrice weekly for approximately 20 minutes using the Oculus Quest 2 (Facebook Reality Labs) VR headset. The control group will read (instead of playing Seas The Day) thrice weekly for approximately 20 minutes over the 6-week period. A mixed methods evaluation will be used. Changes in physical activity, exercise self-efficacy, mood, cognition, and perception will be compared before and after acute data as well as before and after the 6 weeks between the experimental (exergaming) and control (reading) groups. Qualitative data from postintervention focus groups or interviews and informal notes and reports from all participants will be analyzed to assess the feasibility of the study protocol. Qualitative data from the experimental group will also be analyzed to assess the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of at-home VR exergames and explore perceived facilitators of and barriers to uptaking VR systems among community-dwelling older adults. RESULTS: The screening and recruitment process for the experimental group started in May 2021, and the data collection process will be completed by September 2021. The timeline of the recruitment process for the control group is September 2021 to December 2021. We anticipate an estimated adherence rate of ≥80%. Challenges associated with VR technology and the complexity of remote assessments are expected. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study will provide important information on the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a custom-made VR exergaming intervention to promote older adults' well-being. Findings from this study will be useful to inform the methodology, design, study procedures, and assessment protocol for future large-scale trials of VR exergames with older adults as well as deepen the understanding of remote deployment and at-home use of VR for exercise in older adults. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32955.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.282
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207