MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412013154 · doi:10.2196/70620

Platform Technology for Extended Reality Biofeedback Training Under Operant Conditioning for Functional Limb Weakness: Protocol for the Coproduction of an at-Home Solution (React2Home)

2025· article· en· W4412013154 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anirban Dutta, Abhijit Das

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperant conditioningPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBiofeedbackConditioningProduction (economics)PsychologyPhysical therapyComputer scienceMedicineHuman–computer interactionReinforcement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Functional neurological disorder (FND), including functional movement disorders (FMDs), arises from disruptions in the perception-action cycle, where maladaptive cognitive learning processes reduce the sense of agency and motor control. FND significantly impacts quality of life, with patients often experiencing physical disability and psychological distress. Extended reality (XR) technologies present a novel therapeutic opportunity by leveraging biofeedback training to target sensory attenuation and amplification mechanisms, aiming to restore motor function and the sense of agency. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to coproduce and evaluate the usability of an XR technology platform for FND rehabilitation, focusing on functional limb weakness. The platform integrates biofeedback training with haptic and visual feedback to support motor relearning and control. METHODS: We propose to use an experience-based co-design framework to engage patients with FND, caregivers, and health care professionals in collaboratively designing the XR platform. Stakeholders can share their experiences through narrative interviews and co-design workshops, which can identify emotional touchpoints and prioritized patient-centered needs. Insights will be synthesized through qualitative analysis and used to guide the development of system requirements via quality function deployment, ensuring that the platform aligns with user needs. XR training tasks-virtual reality relaxation, XR position feedback, and XR force feedback-will be integrated as needed into a unified therapeutic game experience through 4-week Agile sprints. Usability will be assessed using the System Usability Scale and qualitative feedback, with themes analyzed in NVivo to identify key areas for subsequent improvement. RESULTS: High usability scores (>85) were recorded for the XR position feedback tasks in the predesign study, reflecting excellent usability and participant satisfaction. However, the virtual reality relaxation and XR force feedback tasks exhibited interindividual variability, underscoring the need for personalization. Key themes included customization, comfort, accessibility, and XR technological quality, ensuring that the XR platform effectively addressed diverse patient needs. The predesign study highlighted the potential of XR technology for FMD rehabilitation by integrating biofeedback training into a patient-centered game design framework. Approaches such as experience-based co-design and quality function deployment can support coproduction by systematically addressing usability and accessibility challenges. Brain-based metrics may further strengthen this evaluation. Accordingly, this study will use portable brain imaging to capture dynamic functional connectivity in key brain regions, enabling personalized interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Through coproduction and iterative refinement, this study aims to demonstrate the promise of personalized XR gaming technology as a scalable, at-home solution for FMD rehabilitation. In this context, personalization and accessibility are critical for optimizing usability and long-term clinical outcomes, paving the way for at-home implementation within the FND stepped care model. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/70620.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.008

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 head0.358
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments→French-language works237,207→