MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132527758

Physiological response to a virtual reality simulation for preoperative stress inoculation

2024· article· en· W7132527758 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Catherine Proulx, Michael S. D. Smith, Vincent Gagnon Shaigetz, Gabrielle S. Logan, Jordana L. Sommer, Pamela Hebbard, Krsiten Reynolds, W. Alan Mutch, Natalie Mota, Rakesh C. Arora, Renée Elgabalawy

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractivityVirtual realityAnxietyRandomized controlled trialSkin conductanceMedical simulationSense of presenceSurgical simulationClinical trial
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development of a novel immersive virtual reality (VR) simulation designed to reduce preoperative state anxiety in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. A custom interactive VR simulation allows participants to experience the setting of an operating room and the key preoperative stages, all the way through the administration of general anesthesia. Interactivity is provided through a self-avatar with which the various simulated medical personnel interact directly. We evaluate the capacity of the simulation to induce an emotional response as measured by the participants’ galvanic skin response (GSR). To our knowledge, this is the first fully interactive simulation of an oncology surgery induction procedure for stress inoculation, and the first preoperative VR study to measure emotional impact using GSR. Out of a larger trial, we analyzed 6 participants who had been randomized to the simulation group and for whom baseline and intra-simulation GSR data had been successfully acquired. Three-minute samples were compared for statistical difference with a 95% confidence interval on the mean. 5 out of 6 showed a statistically significant and visually noticeable increase in GSR, and participants reported a high sense of spatial presence. Early results are encouraging, showing that the described simulation can induce a physiological response consistent with the participants' subjective evaluation of presence. While this was a limited experiment, it provides a basis for a larger trial to be conducted in the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.363
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207