MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407843719 · doi:10.2196/69359

Cognitive Remediation for Psychosis in Virtual Reality (ThinkTactic VR): Qualitative, Iterative, and User-Centered Codevelopment Study

2025· article· en· W4407843719 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jasmin Yee, Hannah Matheson, Bryce J. M. Bogie, Émilie Du Perron, Alexandra Thérond, Maëlle Charest, Catheleine van Driel, Ya Ting Lei, Chelsea Noël, Kagusthan Ariaratnam, Ana-Maria Creţu, Marie‐Christine Rivard, Catherine Cullwick, C. Morris, David Attwood, Alexandra Baines, Angela Stewart, Stéphane Bouchard, Christopher R. Bowie, Synthia Guimond

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisQueen's UniversityUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoCarleton UniversityOttawa HospitalRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintVirtual realityPsychologyPsychosisComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychiatryWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cognitive remediation improves cognition and psychosocial functioning in individuals with psychotic disorders. The use of virtual reality (VR) to deliver cognitive remediation in immersive environments that mimic real cognitively challenging situations has the potential to increase engagement to treatment and further enhance its impact on functioning. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to codevelop a cognitive remediation program in VR with individuals with psychotic disorders and health care professionals to identify and address their needs. METHODS: Individuals with lived experience of a psychosis-spectrum condition (n=11) met 9 times and the health care professionals (n=7) met 3 times. Participants discussed personal and professional opinions on the challenges associated with cognitive difficulties in individuals with psychotic disorders. They also provided feedback on the program development. RESULTS: We discerned 4 themes from the content expert working groups: the need for a program to address cognitive impairments, the key program design elements to support cognitive rehabilitation, the importance of leveraging technology as an intervention tool, and the need to improve community functioning. In total, 3 themes were identified for the health care professionals: the need for a clinically relevant program that addresses the research-to-practice gap, the need to improve patient engagement in services, and the need for a program that addresses the limited resources in health care. The needs of our end-user experts were placed at the center of the program development process. When possible, we also integrated their suggestions, like the incorporation of a virtual coach within the immersive environment. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with lived experience and health care professionals have distinct needs, which have informed the co-design of a novel cognitive remediation program in VR, ThinkTactic VR. To our knowledge, ThinkTactic VR is one of the first co-designed and codeveloped cognitive remediation programs in VR using an iterative, user-centered approach involving both individuals with psychotic disorders and health care professionals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental Health→Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→