Feasibility Study of Virtual Reality–Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Patients With Depression: Protocol for an Open Trial and Therapeutic Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical usefulness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for patients with depression who do not remit with pharmacotherapy has been recognized. However, the longer time burden on health care providers associated with conducting CBT and the lack of a system for providing CBT lead to inadequate CBT provision to patients who wish to receive it. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the feasibility of introducing virtual reality (VR) into CBT for patients with depression. METHODS: This is a single-center, interventional, exploratory, single-arm, nonrandomized, open, pre-post-comparative feasibility study of an unapproved medical device program to evaluate the acceptability, preliminary efficacy, and safety of the study device. Eligible patients meet the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition) for major depressive disorder, have a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) score of ≥12, and are aged 18-65 years. The sample will comprise 12 patients. VR-based CBT (CBT-VR) sessions will be conducted once a week in an outpatient setting. CBT-VR has been developed in accordance with 6 stages and 16 sessions in the current CBT therapist manual. VR contents and other components correspond to the themes of these 16 sessions. The flow of CBT-VR treatment is similar to that of normal CBT; however, this product replaces the in-person portion of CBT. The primary end point will be the change in the HAMD-17 score from baseline up to 16 sessions. Secondary end points will be treatment retention; psychiatrist consultation time; satisfaction with the equipment or program; ease of use; homework compliance; change in the HAMD-17 score from baseline up to 8 sessions; change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR), EQ-5D-5L, and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scores from baseline up to 8 and 16 sessions; and change in remission and response rates and HAMD-17, MADRS, QIDS-SR, and EQ-5D-5L scores from baseline to 3 and 6 months post intervention (or discontinuation). CBT-VR's feasibility will be assessed at baseline, after 8 sessions, after 16 sessions, or treatment discontinuation, by measuring the time required for testing and medical care during each session and with a patient questionnaire. After intervention discontinuation, a follow-up evaluation will be conducted unless the patient withdraws consent or otherwise discontinues participation in the study after 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Participant recruitment started on November 30, 2022, and data collection is ongoing as of September 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first step in testing the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy and safety of CBT-VR for patients with depression without controls in an open-label trial. If its feasibility for depression treatment is confirmed, we intend to proceed to a large-scale validation study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs032220481; https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCTs032220481. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49698.
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 | 0.030 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.012 |
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".