MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388849546 · doi:10.1177/02692155231213476

Effects of immersive and non-immersive virtual reality-based rehabilitation training on cognition, motor function, and daily functioning in patients with mild cognitive impairment or dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4388849546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuanyuan Ren, Qingjie Wang, Houyu Liu, Guodong Wang, Aming Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Rehabilitation · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsCochrane LibraryRehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDementiaMeta-analysisCognitionRandomized controlled trialCognitive rehabilitation therapyPhysical therapyVirtual realityMedicinePsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To examine the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)-based rehabilitation training in improving cognition, motor function, and daily functioning in patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. Data sources A systematic review of published literature was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Elsevier, Embase, Cochrane, CNKI, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. Methods The search period was from inception to 7 October 2023. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of VR-based rehabilitation training in patients with mild cognitive impairment or dementia versus control subjects. Methodologic quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and outcomes were calculated as the standard mean difference between participant groups with 95% confidence interval. Results A total of 21 randomized controlled trials with 1138 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that VR-based rehabilitation training had significant effects on Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SMD: 0.50; 95%CI: 0.05 to 0.95; P = 0.030), Trail-making test A (SMD: −0.38; 95%CI: −0.61 to −0.14; P = 0.002), and Berg Balance Scale scores (SMD: 0.79; 95%CI: 0.13 to 1.45; P = 0.020). A subgroup analysis revealed that the type of VR, and duration and frequency of interventions had statistically significant effects on cognition and motor function. Conclusion VR-based rehabilitation training is a beneficial nonpharmacologic approach for managing mild cognitive impairment or dementia. Immersive VR-based training had greater effects on cognition and motor function than non-immersive VR-based training, but non-immersive VR-based training was more convenient for patients with limitations imposed by their disease. Also, an intervention lasting 5–8 weeks and for >30 min at a frequency of ≥3 times/week achieved the best results. It indicated that a longer intervention cycle may not achieve the best intervention effect and training duration and schedule should be carefully considered when managing patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations53
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207