Effects of a Virtual Reality Hypnosis Intervention on Chronic Pain: A User Experience and Proof-of-concept Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chronic pain is a significant public health issue in Canada, with approximately one in four Canadians over the age of 15 living with this condition. Due to its impact on individuals—both physically and psychologically—and its financial burden on the healthcare system, it is crucial to develop cost-effective and efficient treatment methods. Hypnosis and virtual reality have emerged as promising solutions in this context. This study aims to evaluate the preliminary efficacy and feasibility of an intervention combining virtual reality and hypnosis. The study involved 30 patients with chronic pain who were invited to test a hypnosis application delivered through a virtual reality device. Levels of pain, anxiety, and relaxation were measured before and after the intervention, while satisfaction, cybersickness, and user experience were evaluated post-intervention. At the end of the intervention, participants were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview to provide feedback on their satisfaction with the experience. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the intervention, a positive user experience, and minimal symptoms of cybersickness. The intervention was effective in reducing anxiety (W = 173.5, p = .002) and pain (W = 253.5, p < .001) while significantly enhancing relaxation levels (W = 9.00, p < .001). This intervention demonstrated effectiveness in reducing pain and anxiety while improving relaxation levels among individuals with chronic pain, paving the way for further investigations of the involved mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".