MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406191292 · doi:10.1080/08870446.2024.2414807

Optimising an immersive virtual reality behaviour change intervention to support retired and non-working adults to reduce their sedentary behaviour: a mini-focus group interview study

2025· article· en· W4406191292 on OpenAlexaff
David Healy, Aisling Flynn, Gearóid Reilly, Owen Conlan, Anne C. Browne, Jane Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsFocus groupVirtual realityPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Behaviour changeApplied psychologyPerceptionHuman–computer interactionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Prolonged sedentary behaviour is associated with numerous negative health outcomes. Immersive virtual reality (IVR) offers opportunities for retired and non-working adults to take part in meaningful non-sedentary activities that may not be available to them in their natural environment. Using the behaviour change wheel and theoretical domains framework, an IVR intervention prototype was developed. This study aimed to explore and optimise the prototype with retired and non-working adults. A secondary aim was to explore participants' perceptions of IVR more generally. METHODS AND MEASURES: Five semi-structured mini-focus group interviews were conducted with 12 retired and non-working adults. Each group explored the intervention prototype together and discussed their experiences afterwards. A rapid analysis and reflexive thematic analysis (TA) were conducted on the data. RESULTS: Several feasible intervention design changes were generated through the rapid analysis. The reflexive TA generated three themes relating to participants' past experiences reducing their time spent sedentary, how they experienced the intervention prototype as a means to reduce their time spent sedentary, and their perspectives on using such an intervention in the future. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that retired and non-working adults may enjoy using IVR to reduce sedentary time but generally favour natural experiences when possible.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and HealthSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207