A review of virtual reality technologies in the field of communication disability: implications for practice and research

References

• Shaw T, McGregor D, Brunner M, et al. What is eHealth (6)? Development of a conceptual model for eHealth: qualitative study with key informants. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19:e324.
   Google Scholar
• Dascal J, Reid M, Ishak WW, et al. Virtual reality and medical inpatients: a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2017;14:1421.
   Google Scholar
• Laver KE, Lange B, George S, et al. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Libr. 2017;11:CD008349. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub4
   Google Scholar
• Burdett A, Bowen D. BCS glossary of computing and ICT. Swindon, UK: BCS Learning and Development Limited; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman DR, Srinivas B, Emmett TW, et al. Categorizing health outcomes and efficacy of mHealth apps for persons with cognitive impairment: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19:e301.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• The Senate Community Affairs and References Committee. Prevalence of different types of speech, language and communication disorders and speech pathology services in Australia. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Kandalaft MR, Didehbani N, Krawczyk DC, et al. Virtual reality social cognition training for young adults with high-functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2013;43:34–44.
   Google Scholar
• Manivannan S, Al-Amri M, Postans M, et al. The effectiveness of virtual reality interventions for improvement of neurocognitive performance: a systematic review. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2018;1–14. DOI:10.1097/HRT.0000000000000412
   Google Scholar
• Parsons TD, Gaggioli A, Riva G. Virtual reality for research in social neuroscience. Brain Sci. 2017;7:42.
   Google Scholar
• Stendal K, Balandin S. Virtual worlds for people with autism spectrum disorder: a case study in Second Life. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37:1591–1598.
   Google Scholar
• Cruz-Neira C, Sandin DJ, DeFanti TA, et al. The CAVE. Audio visual experience automatic virtual environment. Commun ACM. 1992;35:65–72.
   Google Scholar
• Madary M, Metzinger TK. Recommendations for good scientific practice and the consumers of VR-technology. Front Robot AI. 2016;3:1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Halabi O, El-Seoud SA, Alja’am JM, et al. Design of immersive virtual reality system to improve communication skills in individuals with autism. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2017;12:50–64.
   Google Scholar
• Mennecke B, Konsynski B, Townsend A, et al. Second life and other virtual worlds: a roadmap for research. International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS); Montreal; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Fast-Berglund A, Gong L, Li D. Testing and validating extended reality (xR) technologies in manufacturing. Proc Manuf. 2018;25:31–38.
   Google Scholar
• Snider L, Majnemer A, Darsaklis V. Virtual reality as a therapeutic modality for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Neurorehabil. 2010;13:120–128.
   Google Scholar
• Mirelman A, Maidan I, Herman T, et al. Virtual reality for gait training: can it induce motor learning to enhance complex walking and reduce fall risk in patients with Parkinson’s disease? J Gerontol: A. 2011;66A:234–240.
   Google Scholar
• Housman SJ, Scott KM, Reinkensmeyer DJ. A randomized controlled trial of gravity-supported, computer-enhanced arm exercise for individuals with severe hemiparesis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:505–514.
   Google Scholar
• Shin JH, Park SB, Jang SH. Effects of game‐based virtual reality on health‐related quality of life in chronic stroke patients: a randomized, controlled study. Comput Biol Med. 2015;63:92–98.
   Google Scholar
• Uçar DE, Paker N, Buğdaycı D. Lokomat: a therapeutic chance for patients with chronic hemiplegia. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34:447–453.
   Google Scholar
• Manera V, Chapoulie E, Bourgeois J, et al. A feasibility study with image-based rendered virtual reality in patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0151487.
   Google Scholar
• Krijn M, Emmelkamp PM, Olafsson RP, et al. Virtual reality exposure therapy of anxiety disorders: a review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2004;24:259–281.
   Google Scholar
• Parsons TD, Rizzo AA. Affective outcomes of virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety and specific phobias: a meta-analysis. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2008;39:250–261.
   Google Scholar
• Walkom G. Virtual reality exposure therapy: to benefit those who stutter and treat social anxiety. In: IEEE, editor. International Conference on Interactive Technologies and Games (ITAG); 2016 Oct 26–27; Nottingham, UK; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• EVA. EVA Park. London, UK: City, University of London; 2018; [cited 2018 Jun 27]. Available from: http://smcse.city.ac.uk/eva/
   Google Scholar
• Marshall J, Booth T, Devane N, et al. Evaluating the benefits of aphasia intervention delivered in virtual reality: results of a quasi-randomised study. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0160381.
   Google Scholar
• Carragher M, Talbot R, Devane N, et al. Delivering storytelling intervention in the virtual world of EVA Park. Aphasiology. 2018;32(Supp. 1):37–39. DOI:10.1080/02687038.2018.1484880
   Google Scholar
• Marshall J, Devane N, Edmonds L, et al. Delivering word retrieval therapies for people with aphasia in a virtual communication environment. Aphasiology. 2018;32:1054–1074.
   Google Scholar
• Galliers J, Wilson S, Marshall J, et al. Experiencing EVA park, a multi-user virtual world for people with aphasia. ACM Trans Access Comput. 2017;10:1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Amaya A, Woolf C, Devane N, et al. Receiving aphasia intervention in a virtual environment: the participants’ perspective. Aphasiology. 2018;32:538–558.
   Google Scholar
• Stendal K, Balandin S, Molka-Danielsen J. Virtual worlds: a new opportunity for people with lifelong disability? J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2011;36:80–83.
   Google Scholar
• Jones MB, Kennedy RS, Stanney KM. Toward systematic control of cybersickness. Presence: Teleoperat Virt Environ. 2004;13:589–600.
   Google Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie N, Damico JS. Exploring clinical interaction in speech-language therapy: narrative, discourse and relationships. In: Fourie RJ, editor. Therapeutic processes for communication disorders: a guide for clinicians and students. Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press; 2010. p. 51–68.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia LJ, Rebolledo M, Metthé L, et al. The potential of virtual reality to assess functional communication in aphasia. Top Lang Disord. 2007;27:272–288.
   Google Scholar
• Mantovani F, Castelnuovo G, Gaggioli A, et al. Virtual reality training for health-care professionals. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2003;6:389–395.
   Google Scholar
• Conradi E, Kavia S, Burden D, et al. Virtual patients in a virtual world: training paramedic students for practice. Med Teach. 2009;31:713–720.
   Google Scholar
• Maicher K, Danforth D, Price A, et al. Developing a conversational virtual standardized patient to enable students to practice history-taking skills. Simul Healthc. 2017;12:124–131.
   Google Scholar
• Foronda C, Gattamorta K, Snowden K, et al. Use of virtual clinical simulation to improve communication skills of baccalaureate nursing students: a pilot study. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34:e53–e57.
   Google Scholar
• Brey P. The ethics of representation and action in virtual reality. Ethics Inf Technol. 1999;1:5–14.
   Google Scholar
• Slater M, Antley A, Davison A, et al. A virtual reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments. PLoS One. 2006;1:e39.
   Google Scholar
• Jutten LH, Mark RE, Maria Janssen BWJ, et al. Testing the effectivity of the mixed virtual reality training Into D'mentia for informal caregivers of people with dementia: protocol for a longitudinal, quasi-experimental study. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e015702.
   Google Scholar
• Flower A, Burns MK, Bottsford-Miller NA. Meta-analysis of disability simulation research. Remedial Spec Educ. 2007;28:72–79.
   Google Scholar
• Nario-Redmond MR, Gospodinov D, Cobb A. Crip for a day: the unintended negative consequences of disability simulations. Rehabil Psychol. 2017;62:324–333.
   Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh J, Murza KA, Malani MD, et al. Effects of communication partner instruction on the communication of individuals using AAC: a meta-analysis. Augment Altern Comm. 2015;31:271–284.
   Google Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie N, Raymer A, Cherney LR. Communication partner training in aphasia: an updated systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97:2202–2221.
   Google Scholar
• Togher L, McDonald S, Tate R, et al. The effectiveness of social communication partner training for adults with severe chronic TBI and their families using a measure of perceived communication ability. NeuroRehabilitation. 2016;38:243–255.
   Google Scholar
• Peck T, Seinfeld S, Aglioti S, et al. Putting yourself in the skin of a black avatar reduces implicit racial bias. Conscious Cogn. 2013;22:779–787.
   Google Scholar
• Hershfield H, Goldstein D, Sharpe W, et al. Increasing saving behavior through age-progressed renderings of the future self. J Mark Res. 2011;48:23–37.
   Google Scholar
• Whally LJ. Ethical issues in the application of virtual reality to medicine. Comput Biol Med. 1995;25:107–114.
   Google Scholar
• Spiegel JS. The ethics of virtual reality technology: social hazards and public policy recommendations. Sci Eng Ethics. 2017;24:1537–1550. DOI:10.1007/s11948-017-9979-y
   Google Scholar
• Oculus VR LLC. Oculus privacy policy. Menlo Park, CA: Facebook; 2018 [updated 20 May 2018; cited 2018 Jul 2]. Available from: https://www.oculus.com/legal/privacy-policy/
   Google Scholar
• Merhi O, Faugloire E, Flanagan M, et al. Motion sickness, console video games, and head-mounted displays. Hum Factors. 2007;49:920–934.
   Google Scholar
• Sharples S, Cobb S, Moody A, et al. Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. Displays. 2008;29:58–69.
   Google Scholar
• Jankovic J. Parkinson’s disease: clinical features and diagnosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79:368–376.
   Google Scholar
• Rose J, Wolff DR, Jones VK, et al. Postural balance in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002;44:58–63.
   Google Scholar
• Golding JF. Motion sickness susceptibility questionnaire revised and its relationship to other forms of sickness. Brain Res Bull. 1998;47:507–516.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy RS, Lane NE, Berbaum KS, et al. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int J Aviat Psychol. 1993;3:203–220.
   Google Scholar
• Stanney KM. Realizing the full potential of virtual reality: human factors issues that could stand in the way. Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium; Mar 11–25. North Carolina: IEEE Computer Society Press; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Jenaro C, Flores N, Frías CP. Systematic review of empirical studies on cyberbullying in adults: what we know and what we should investigate. Aggress Violent Behav. 2018;38:113–122.
   Google Scholar
• Hemsley B, Dann S, Palmer S, et al. “We definitely need an audience”: experiences of Twitter, Twitter networks and tweet content in adults with severe communication disabilities who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37:1531–1542.
   Google Scholar
• Brunner M, Hemsley B, Dann S, et al. Hashtag# TBI: a content and network data analysis of tweets about traumatic. Brain Inj. 2018;32:49–63.
   Google Scholar
• Lough E, Fisher MH. Internet use and online safety in adults with Williams syndrome. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2016;60:1020–1030.
   Google Scholar