MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409782817 · doi:10.2196/71961

Virtual Reality for the Prevention and Cessation of Nicotine Vaping in Youths: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4409782817 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Belinda Borrelli, Daniel Weinstein, Romano Endrighi, Nikki Ling, Lisa M. Quintiliani, Kaitlyn Konieczny

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialSmoking cessationNicotineMedicineVirtual realityPsychologyComputer sciencePsychiatryAlternative medicineWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interactionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Only a few trials target high school-aged teens with vaping interventions, typically focusing on prevention rather than cessation, with content limited to vaping harms and refusal skills. Given the co-occurrence and increasing incidence of vaping and mental health issues in teens, both must be simultaneously addressed by vaping interventions. OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a virtual reality (VR) intervention for teens that targets both determinants of vaping (eg, mood and stress) and vaping prevention and cessation skills. METHODS: The participants are 150 students attending 1 of 2 racially and ethnically diverse Boston-area high schools. Health classes are randomly assigned to VR or control (assessment only). Students are eligible if not opted out by their parents, provided assent, and did not have health issues that preclude participation. While control classes (and ineligible students within them) have their regular classroom activity, VR classes are provided with Oculus Meta Quest 2 headsets and engage with the intervention during 3 class periods, once per week. Players solve a mystery with a vaping subplot and play a series of minigames to teach emotional regulation, coping strategies, and building resilience. A mobile app connects to the VR game, providing a home-based experience to reinforce skills learned. VR and control classes complete baseline and postintervention surveys on the same schedule. Primary outcome measures include feasibility, satisfaction and engagement with game play, and vaping awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and intentions to avoid or quit vaping. Secondary outcomes include vaping quit attempts, 7- and 30-day point prevalence abstinence, motivation and self-efficacy to quit or avoid vaping, positive and negative affect, emotional regulation and coping, and motion sickness. RESULTS: The project was approved by the institutional review board on April 2, 2024, and data collection began in April 2024 and concluded in June 2024, and 150 participants were recruited (98 intervention and 52 control). Although freshmen and sophomore classes were targeted in this study, there were several juniors and seniors (n=5) in these classes due to school transfers and the need for them to take the mandatory curriculum. Data cleaning has been completed, and analyses are ongoing. The results are expected to be submitted for publication in August of 2025. CONCLUSIONS: As VR is visual, auditory, and tactile, it is ideal for practicing skills, facilitating memory, and increasing the likelihood of transfer to real-world settings. The immersion of VR promotes engagement with the intervention, rather than external digital temptations. Our study is innovative due to the cluster-randomized design, focus on both prevention and cessation, integration of mood management, and implementation among racially and ethnically diverse teens. Incorporation into school-based health curricula allows for proactive reach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06003439; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06003439. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/71961.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.003
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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207