首页> 外文期刊>Scientific reports. >The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
【24h】

The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis

机译:基于虚拟现实的焦虑症和抑郁症干预措施的有效性:一项荟萃分析

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

We report a meta-analysis of virtual reality (VR) interventions for anxiety and depression outcomes, as well as treatment attrition. We included randomized controlled trials comparing VR interventions, alone or in combination, to control conditions or other active psychological interventions. Effects sizes (Hedges’ g) for anxiety and depression outcomes, as post-test and follow-up, were pooled with a random-effects model. Drop-outs were compared using odds ratio (OR) with a Mantel-Haenszel model. We included 39 trials (52 comparisons). Trial risk of bias was unclear for most domains, and high for incomplete outcome data. VR-based therapies were more effective than control at post-test for anxiety, g?=?0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.02, and depression, g?=?0.73, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.21, but not for treatment attrition, OR?=?1.34, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.89. Heterogeneity was high and there was consistent evidence of small study effects. There were no significant differences between VR-based and other active interventions. VR interventions outperformed control conditions for anxiety and depression but did not improve treatment drop-out. High heterogeneity, potential publication bias, predominant use of waitlist controls, and high or uncertain risk of bias of most trials question the reliability of these effects.
机译:我们报告了针对焦虑和抑郁结果以及治疗损耗的虚拟现实(VR)干预措施的荟萃分析。我们纳入了随机对照试验,比较了单独或组合使用VR干预与控制病情或其他积极的心理干预。测试后和随访后,焦虑和抑郁结果的效应量(Hedges’g)与随机效应模型合并。使用比值比(OR)与Mantel-Haenszel模型比较辍学率。我们纳入了39个试验(52个比较)。对于大多数领域,偏倚的试验风险尚不明确,对于不完整的结果数据则偏高。基于VR的疗法在焦虑后测试g?=?0.79,95%CI为0.57至1.02,抑郁症,g?=?0.73,95%CI为0.25至1.21,对治疗更有效,但对治疗减员无效,或≥1.34,95%CI为0.95至1.89。异质性很高,并且有一致的证据表明研究效果很小。基于VR的干预与其他主动干预之间没有显着差异。 VR干预优于焦虑和抑郁的控制条件,但并未改善治疗辍学率。大多数试验的高度异质性,潜在的发表偏倚,主要使用候补对照以及偏倚的高风险或不确定风险都对这些效果的可靠性提出了质疑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号