PTOtherJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2019

Tracking the evolution of virtual reality applications to rehabilitation as a field of study.

Emily A Keshner, Patrice Tamar Weiss, Dorit Geifman and 1 others

PMID 31226995

WHAT IT FOUND

Virtual reality rehabilitation is not one established field.

It is many disciplines using the same technology, with inconsistent terms and little sharing of results between physical and psychological work. Do not assume evidence transfers across conditions.

Key findings

01The final analysed corpus contained 1814 relevant publications, including 231 from 1996 to 2005, 807 from 2006 to 2014, and 776 from 2015 to mid-2018.

02The citation network showed separate clusters for physical and psychological rehabilitation topics, with few overlapping citations.

03The analysis suggested VR-based rehabilitation is a network of interlinked disciplines using common technology, not one cohesive field.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The search used one database, so it may have missed relevant publications outside that database. The study describes publication patterns but does not test why those patterns occur, so it cannot prove that VR rehabilitation works or does not work. Domain experts chose the topic labels, and the authors say this labeling is somewhat subjective, even though the papers were filtered automatically. The latest period covers only the first 6 months of 2018, so it is not a full year.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read this as evidence that virtual reality improves rehabilitation outcomes. The paper analysed publication patterns and terminology, not patient results, so it cannot tell you whether a VR treatment works.

Read it on PubMed →