MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415455612 · doi:10.2196/75952

Using Virtual Reality to Assess Spatial Navigation Ability in Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4415455612 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ming‐Chyi Pai, Yuh-Ting Lin, Chia-Hung Lai, Chih-Jen Chen, Chaur‐Jong Hu, Cheng‐Yu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityCognitive impairmentSpatial cognitionNavigation systemCognitionSpatial memoryCorrelationSpatial ability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Spatial navigation impairment is prevalent in people with Alzheimer disease (AD) and may appear in its initial clinical stage. Detecting this deficit in people at risk may not only help prevent them from getting lost or going missing but also provide a useful clinical aid to accurate diagnosis. Traditional assessments for spatial navigation impairment include questionnaires, paper-and-pencil and maze tests, or video games. While a real-world setting is more valid, direct, and accurate, it is plagued by unpredictable conditions such as weather, obstacles, or accidents. Owing to modern technology, virtual reality (VR) offers a new way to test spatial navigation impairment. Objective: The aims of this study were to test the feasibility of a VR setting to assess sense of location in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and the power of VR to discriminate among groups with different clinical conditions. Methods: We used the Pai-Jan virtual reality (PJVR) device to test spatial navigation ability in those who were cognitively unimpaired (CU) and those who experienced subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and MCI. The PJVR device is the VR version (VIVE Pro Eye head-mounted display) of the Pai-Jan device, which has demonstrated its power to discriminate among CU, AD MCI, and mild AD dementia. With a map provided and using joysticks or handles, participants were asked to reach 5 points on a 660-m path. Linear deviation (LD; in meters) from each target point and vector deviation (in degrees) from the direction to the start point at each location were treated as the variables for comparison. Results: A total of 113 participants provided informed consent to initiate the study. Of these 113 participants, 93 (82.3%) completed the trials, including 22 (24%) who were CU, 39 (42%) with SCD, and 32 (34%) with MCI. In total, 17.7% (20/113) failed the trials due to cybersickness. The mean LD of the CU, SCD, and MCI groups was 38.2 (SD 39.5), 50.4 (SD 40.7), and 100.4 (SD 46.2) meters, respectively (P<.001). The MCI group showed greater vector deviation (mean 63.2, SD 42.4 degrees) than either the SCD (mean 39.4, SD 33.0 degrees) or CU (mean 38.6, SD 37.4 degrees; P=.02) group. The LD of the PJVR device was correlated with the total scores on the caregiver version of the Questionnaire on Everyday Navigational Ability (P<.001), indicating good ecological validity. Conclusions: The PJVR device is feasible for older adults and participants with MCI. It can detect spatial navigation deficits related to AD pathology, and the results show a close correlation with real-world navigation ability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207