MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416660777 · doi:10.2196/70598

Interest in and Predictors of Engagement With a Virtual Reality Intervention Among People With Chronic Pain: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

2025· article· en· W4416660777 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Genevieve R Bryant, Samuel A Holzman, Hector R. Perez

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityIntervention (counseling)Ethnically diverseSurvey researchPsychological interventionSurvey data collectionAffect (linguistics)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although chronic pain (CP) is highly prevalent, current modalities are not sufficient to address the needs of people living with this condition. Pharmacological treatments for CP can have severe side effects and increased likelihood of patients overdosing or developing addiction. Behavioral treatments are often indicated for the treatment of CP, but barriers to treatment are common. Virtual reality (VR)-based interventions have shown promise as an effective and potentially accessible form of treatment for CP. However, previous research on VR interventions for people living with CP has not often included diverse populations, including racial and ethnic minority groups and people with low socioeconomic status. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to gauge the interest of patients with CP in participating in a hypothetical study of at-home VR for CP and to identify predictors of interest. Patients were recruited from a low socioeconomic and racially and ethnically diverse community. METHODS: A total of 48 participants living with CP were recruited from an electronic medical record database, a research participant database, and a pain clinic, and they completed surveys about demographics, pain levels, technology use, and knowledge of VR. Bivariate testing was used to determine which, if any, of the aforementioned variables were associated with interest in a hypothetical study of at-home VR for CP. Stepwise logistic regression models predicting interest were built based on bivariate testing. Finally, we used a thematic analysis framework to analyze an additional open-ended question about reasons for interest in participating in a VR intervention for CP. RESULTS: Despite low technology use and little knowledge and experience with VR, results showed high interest (42/48, 88%) among patients in participating in a hypothetical study of at-home VR for CP. More frequent email use and using Facebook demonstrated nonsignificant trends toward interest in participating in a VR clinical trial for pain (P=.06 for email use and P=.06 for Facebook use). In stepwise multivariate models controlling for pain score, Facebook use was predictive of being somewhat or very interested in participating in a VR clinical trial for pain (P=.047). Open-ended responses tended to cite the novelty of VR and desperation for pain relief as reasons for participants' interest. CONCLUSIONS: We found high interest in participating in a clinical trial of VR despite low use of technology and low knowledge of VR. Future fully powered studies should seek to confirm the effectiveness of VR treatments for people with CP, especially people from lower socioeconomic, and racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 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 Human FactorsSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207