A systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of virtual reality-based well-being interventions for stress reduction in young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Adolescents can be especially vulnerable to various stressors as they are still in their formative years and transitioning into adulthood. Hence, it is important for them to have effective stress management strategies. This systematic review investigates current well-being interventions that are aimed at reducing stress among young adults. In particular, interventions using the medium of virtual reality are explored. Methods This mixed-methods systematic review follows the PRISMA-P guidelines and articles were gathered for the databases PsycInfo, PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, Open Grey and Edutopia. Predetermined criteria and specific keywords were used to search for the articles. Search results were screened and extracted by two independent authors. Any disagreements after reconciliation were settled by a third author. The quality and risk of bias of included studies were assessed using the GRADE Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Studies were analyzed qualitatively. Results Among the appraised studies, the effectiveness of virtual reality-based interventions was measured in three contexts: nature, stress, and academics. Conclusion Studies using virtual reality interventions, overall, promoted a reduction in stress and an increase in well-being. The findings suggest VR may serve as an accessible and affordable medium of stress reduction for students and young adults. Larger sample sizes, and a greater number of included studies, may be required in future directions.
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 | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".