SynthesisPloS one2024
Improving immersive experiences in virtual natural setting for public health and environmental design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nature-based interventions: a systematic review of reviews.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of Digital Nature Interventions on Positive Psychological Outcomes: A Scoping Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Immediate and Short-Term Effects of Nature-Based Immersive Virtual Reality During Dry Needling: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Emotional Regulation and Physiological Responses to a Cultural Heritage Virtual Reality Experience in Older Adults: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR aging · 2026Article
- Virtual Nature, Metaverse, and NAD⁺: A Narrative Review for Health Planning and Healthy Ageing.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Translating behavioral interventions into virtual reality: theFrontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Mind and body recovery: how rural tourism promotes occupational health in the public health context.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Virtual nature, real relief: how exposure to virtual natural environments reduces anxiety, stress, and depression in healthy adults.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Mechanisms of Virtual Reality-Based Relaxation in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Concussion and the Autonomic, Immune, and Endocrine Systems: An Introduction to the Field and a Treatment Framework for Persisting Symptoms.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Virtual Reality to Improve the Psychological and Physical Well-Being in Cancer Patients: An Umbrella Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Effects of simulated multi-sensory stimulation integration on physiological and psychological restoration in virtual urban green space environment.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, virtual reality (VR) technology has emerged as a powerful tool in the field of therapeutic landscapes. For hospitalized patients or individuals with limited mobility, VR provides highly personalized therapy by simulating authentic natural environments within a safe, convenient, and engaging setting. This study investigated the effectiveness of immersing patients in virtual natural environments for health recovery and compared the varying impacts of different types of landscapes on patients' recovery levels. The aim was to complement traditional medical approaches and enhance environmental design in the field of public health. Researchers systematically reviewed databases (January 2018 to August 2, 2023) to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of virtual nature immersion with other treatments. The inclusion/exclusion criteria were established based on the population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design, and other aspects (expanded PICO) framework. The Cochrane tool was employed to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was conducted by pooling the mean differences with a 95% confidence interval. Among 30 trials, a total of 2123 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 15 studies included in the meta-analysis. 30 trials met the criteria. Results show significant improvements in pain, anxiety, fear, and some physiological indicators with virtual nature-based treatments. On the other hand, natural scenes incorporating blue and green elements have been applied more extensively and have shown more significant effects. In comparison to conventional methods, this study strongly advocates that virtual reality environments are a crucial tool in bridging the gap between patients and nature, demonstrating their potential to reshape medical interventions and improve environmental design in the field of public health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.