MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408312226 · doi:10.2196/68132

Acceptability, Usability, and Insights Into Cybersickness Levels of a Novel Virtual Reality Environment for the Evaluation of Depressive Symptoms: Exploratory Observational Study

2025· article· en· W4408312226 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sára Sütöri, Emma Eliasson, Francesca Mura, Victor Ortiz, Vincenzo Catrambone, Gergö Hadlaczky, Ivo Todorov, Antonio Luca Alfeo, Valentina Cardi, Mario G. C. A. Cimino, Giovanna Mioni, Mariano Alcañíz, Gaetano Valenza, Vladimir Carli, Claudio Gentili

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityPreprintVirtual realityMental healthPsychologyApplied psychologyHuman–computer interactionComputer sciencePsychotherapistWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a clear need for enhanced mental health assessment, depressive symptom (DS) evaluation being no exception. A promising approach to this aim is using virtual reality (VR), which entails the potential of adding a wider set of assessment domains with enhanced ecological validity. However, whilst several studies have used VR for both diagnostic and treatment purposes, its acceptance, in particular how exposure to virtual environments affects populations with psychiatric conditions remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to report on the acceptability, usability, and cybersickness levels of a pilot VR environment designed for the purpose of differentiating between individuals with DSs. METHODS: The exploratory study, conducted in Italy, included 50 healthy controls and 50 young adults with mild-to-moderate DSs (without the need for a formal diagnosis). The study used an observational design with approximately 30 minutes of VR exposure followed by a self-report questionnaire battery. The battery included a questionnaire based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability, the System Usability Scale as well as the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire. RESULTS: Results indicate that the majority found VR acceptable for the purposes of mental health screening and treatment. However, for diagnostics, there was a clear preference for VR to be used by mental health professionals as a supplementary tool, as opposed to a stand-alone solution. In practice, following exposure to the pilot VR environment, generally, good levels of acceptability and usability were reported, but areas in need of improvement were identified (such as self-efficacy). Self-reported cybersickness levels were comparable to literature averages but were considerably higher among those with DSs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings raise questions about the potential interplay between underlying somatic symptoms of depression and VR-induced cybersickness and call for more attention from the scientific community both in terms of methodology as well as potential clinical and theoretical implications. Conclusively, user support indicates a potential for VR to aid mental health assessment, but further research is needed to understand how exposure to virtual environments might affect populations with varying severity and other forms of psychiatric symptoms. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/ISRCTN16396369.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207