MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312730938 · doi:10.2196/41523

Virtual Reality Therapy for People With Epilepsy and Related Anxiety: Protocol for a 3-Phase Pilot Clinical Trial

2022· article· en· W4312730938 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Hannah Gabrielle Gray, Danielle Tchao, Samantha Lewis-Fung, Susanna Pardini, Laurence R. Harris, Lora Appel

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto East General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsEpilepsyAnxietyPopulationVirtual realityClinical trialQuality of life (healthcare)Protocol (science)PsychologyMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychotherapistAlternative medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anxiety is one of the most common psychiatric comorbidities in people with epilepsy and often involves fears specifically related to the condition, such as anxiety related to the fear of having another seizure. These epilepsy- or seizure-related fears have been reported as being more disabling than the seizures themselves and significantly impact quality of life. Although research has suggested that exposure therapy (ET) is helpful in decreasing anxiety in people with epilepsy, no research to our knowledge has been conducted on ET in people with epilepsy using virtual reality (VR). The use of novel technologies such as an immersive VR head-mounted display for ET in this population offers several benefits. Indeed, using VR can increase accessibility for people with epilepsy with transportation barriers (eg, those who live outside urban centers or who have a suspended driver's license owing to their condition), among other advantages. In the present research protocol, we describe the design of an innovative VR-ET program administered in the home that focuses on decreasing anxiety in people with epilepsy, specifically anxiety related to their epilepsy or seizures. OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective is to examine the feasibility of the study protocol and proposed treatment as well as identify suggestions for improvement when designing subsequent larger clinical trials. Our secondary objective is to evaluate whether VR-ET is effective in decreasing anxiety in a pilot study. We hypothesize that levels of anxiety in people with epilepsy will decrease from using VR-ET. METHODS: This mixed methods study comprises 3 phases. Phase 1 involves engaging with those with lived experience through a web-based questionnaire to validate assumptions about anxiety in people with epilepsy. Phase 2 involves filming videos using a 360° camera for the VR-ET intervention (likely consisting of 3 sets of scenes, each with 3 intensity levels) based on the epilepsy- and seizure-related fears most commonly reported in the phase 1 questionnaire. Finally, phase 3 involves evaluating the at-home VR-ET intervention and study methods using a series of validated scales, as well as semistructured interviews. RESULTS: This pilot study was funded in November 2021. Data collection for phase 1 was completed as of August 7, 2022, and had a final sample of 18 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings will add to the limited body of knowledge on anxiety in people with epilepsy and the use of VR in this population. We anticipate that the insights gained from this study will lay the foundation for a novel and accessible VR intervention for this underrecognized and undertreated comorbidity in people with epilepsy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05296057; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05296057. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41523.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.010

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 head0.384
GPT teacher head0.617
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207