Cited by 187Cancer survivorship and careVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsPediatric Pain Management Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of virtual reality on time perception in patients receiving chemotherapy

Open access

Abstract

Purpose Virtual reality (VR) during chemotherapy has resulted in an elapsed time compression effect, validating the attention diversion capabilities of VR. Using the framework of the pacemaker-accumulator cognitive model of time perception, this study explored the influence of age, gender, state anxiety, fatigue, and cancer diagnosis in predicting the difference between actual time elapsed during receipt of intravenous chemotherapy while immersed in a VR environment versus patient's retrospective estimates of time elapsed during this treatment. Materials and methods This secondary analysis from three studies yielded a pooled sample of N = 137 participants with breast, lung, or colon cancer. Each study employed a crossover design requiring two matched intravenous chemotherapy treatments, with participants randomly assigned to receive VR during one treatment. Regressions modeled the effect of demographic variables, diagnosis, and Piper Fatigue Scale and State Anxiety Inventory scores on the difference between actual and estimated time elapsed during chemotherapy with VR. Results In a forward regression model, three predictors (diagnosis, gender, and anxiety) explained a significant portion of the variability for altered time perception (F=5.06, p = 0.0008). Diagnosis was the strongest predictor; individuals with breast and colon cancer perceived time passed more quickly. Conclusions VR is a noninvasive intervention that can make chemotherapy treatments more tolerable. Women with breast cancer are more likely and lung cancer patients less likely to experience altered time perception during VR (a possible indicator of effectiveness for this distraction intervention). Understanding factors that predict responses to interventions can help clinicians tailor coping strategies to meet each patient's needs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00520-010-0852-7

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 44 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Schneider SM, Hood LE (2007) Virtual reality: a distraction intervention for chemotherapy. Oncol Nurs Forum 34(1):39–46. doi: 10.1188/07.ONF.39-46 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Verdura GS, Alaimo S, Borzì R, Fazio M, Scavo V (2005) Trying to listen: needs of patients treated with chemotherapy. Support Palliat Cancer Care 2(1):15–20

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Schneider, S. M., Kisby, C. K., & Flint, E. P.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Schneider, Susan M.
Venue
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published
2010-03-26
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
555-564
ISSN
  • 0941-4355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7339
OpenAlex
W2006568735
Cited by
187
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Supportive Care in Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Nursing Research (1 P20 NR07795-01, P20NR007795)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
virtual reality, time perception, chemotherapy, pacemaker-accumulator model, distraction therapy, cancer pain management, breast cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, state anxiety, fatigue, gender differences, cancer diagnosis
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Antineoplastic Agents, Anxiety, Breast Neoplasms, Colonic Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Regression Analysis, Sex Factors, Time Perception, User-Computer Interface, Cross-Over Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review