ReviewHealth science reports2026
Effectiveness of Virtual Exercise Intervention in Adults With Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Virtual reality-based exercise is an emerging tool in mental health care; however, its application and effectiveness in treating Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) remain unclear. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of virtual exercise interventions for adults with MDD, focusing on depressive symptoms, functional outcomes, and the certainty of the available evidence. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, AMED) were systematically searched for studies evaluating virtual exercise interventions in adults with MDD. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, methodological quality assessment using Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies (ROBINS-I) tools. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: Of the 603 articles, four studies met the inclusion criteria, evaluating the VRelax, Pacifica, and CORE interventions. Pacifica and CORE demonstrated moderate improvements in depressive symptoms compared with control groups, while VRelax primarily improved stress and negative affect. The interventions were generally well accepted, with high participant engagement and adherence. Overall certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to low-moderate and was limited by relatively small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and short follow-up periods. Conclusions: Virtual exercise intervention may represent a promising adjunct to conventional therapy for MDD. Although current evidence supports improvements in depressive symptoms and emotional well-being, further randomized controlled trials with larger samples, longer follow-up, and objective neurobiological outcome measures are needed to confirm long-term efficacy and clinical applicability.
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.