Appropriate Image Selection With Virtual Reality in Vestibular Rehabilitation: Cross-sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While vestibular rehabilitation with virtual reality (VR) is becoming more popular every day, the disadvantages of this method are not yet clear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine the effect of the image to be used in vestibular rehabilitation with VR on the systems that provide body posture. METHODS: The study was carried out with 36 participants (18 women and 18 men) aged 18 to 30 years. To assess balance control components separately, a sensory organization test was administered to the participants in the presence of stressful and relaxing environment images with VR technology. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory survey was also used to measure the stress values in the created environments. RESULTS: The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory survey revealed that while stressful videos significantly increased stress, relaxing videos reduced stress. Among measurements obtained in the presence of VR, significant decreases were observed mostly in the visual system data. A significant increase in vestibular system data (P=.01) was observed with a decrease in visual system data (P<.001) when the relaxing image was presented. Additionally, there was a significant difference in the somatosensory (P=.001), composite (P=.002), and visual system (P<.001) data in the presence of stressful videos. CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of a VR system for vestibular rehabilitation is relatively new, no extant studies have examined how the image type used in VR can affect the integration of visual system data. Therefore, this study is unique in terms of showing the effects of the stress created by the change in the type of the image used in VR. When VR technology is used for therapeutic vestibular rehabilitation for patients whose balance disorder is due to the vestibular system, stress-free videos should be used. However, the use of stressful videos in VR technology will be beneficial in the rehabilitation of those with balance disorders due to the somatosensory system.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".