Virtual reality–guided mindfulness for chronic pain in cancer survivors: protocol for the virtual mind study—a single-group feasibility trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Chronic cancer-related pain (CRP) can have a significant negative impact on quality of life. Mindfulness is hypothesized to mitigate chronic CRP by regulating both physical and emotional resistance to pain. In recent years, there has been interest in the use of virtual reality (VR) to deliver mindfulness meditation. VR provides an immersive and engaging environment, which may enhance one's focused attention to present-moment experiences, potentially making mindfulness less effortful and more efficacious for individuals with chronic pain. There has been little research in this area for people with a history of cancer. Objective: The aim of this mixed methods study is to evaluate the feasibility of a VR-guided mindfulness (VRGM) intervention offered to adult cancer survivors with chronic CRP. Methods: This mixed methods feasibility study will employ a single-arm, pretest-posttest design with semistructured interviews. In total, 15 cancer survivors will be enrolled in a 6-week home-based intervention that consists of 10-15 min of daily VRGM practice. The primary outcome is feasibility as assessed by accrual rates, retention in the study, intervention adherence, questionnaire completion, and side effect rates. Participants will be assessed on psychosocial outcome measures (i.e., pain, sleep, depressive and anxiety symptoms, fatigue, quality of life, and mindfulness) before and after the intervention, and 6 weeks post intervention (follow-up). Changes in pain will be described in relation to levels of immersion and presence in the virtual environment, trait mindfulness, and amount of VRGM practice. Qualitative information will provide subjective detail on participants' experience with VRGM to complement quantitative data. This study has been approved by the Health Research Ethics Board of Alberta Cancer Committee (HREBA.CC-20-0411). Conclusions: This novel intervention provides a potential alternative treatment to pharmacological pain management. Results from this study may inform future larger VGRM trials for chronic CRP to help reduce suffering in people with cancer. Study findings will be disseminated through open access publications, traditional conference presentations, professional cancer organizations, and social media platforms.
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 | 0.049 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".