Table 4 VR-enhanced therapy vs. active condition contrast, post-treatment.

From: The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis

Anxiety symptoms		N	g^a	95% CI	I ²	I² 95% CI	NNT	p^b
All studies		29	−0.02	−0.14 to 0.10	20	0 to 50	83.33
Outliers excluded^c		27	−0.02	−0.13 to 0.08	0	0 to 43	83.33
Only studies with >25 randomized per arm		12	−0.05	−0.19 to 0.07	1	0 to 59	35.71
Only studies involving anxiety disorders		23	−0.10	−0.24 to 0.04	26	0 to 55	17.86
Subgroup analyses ^d
Country	N. America	9	−0.12	−0.31 to 0.06	0	0 to 65	14.71	0.198
	EU	18	0.04	−0.13 to 0.23	39	0 to 65	45.45
VR program author	N	8	0.09	−0.21 to 0.40	54	0 to 79	20.00	0.372
among author pool^e	Y	20	−0.05	−0.18 to 0.07	0	0 to 48	35.71
Recruitment^f	Army	2	−0.32	−0.64 to −0.005	0	N/Aⁱ	5.56
	Clinic	7	0.03	−0.17 to 0.23	0	0 to 71	62.50	0.159
	Community	17	0.001	−0.19 to 0.19	43	0 to 68	1772.4
Control group	CBT	18	0.03	−0.09 to 0.16	0	0 to 50	62.50	0.120
	IE	6	−0.16	−0.41 to 0.08	0	0 to 75	11.11
	IVE	4	−0.35	−0.78 to 0.07	49	0 to 83	5.10
Experimental	VRCBT	17	0.09	−0.04 to 0.24	3	0 to 53	20.00	0.016
intervention	VRE	12	−0.18	−0.35 to −0.006	11	0 to 50	9.80
Type of anxiety disorder	Flight anxiety	7	0.21	−0.12 to 0.54	41	0 to 75	8.47	0.206
	Panic disorder	6	−0.05	−0.32 to 0.21	0	0 to 75	35.71
	PTSD	2	−0.32	−0.64 to −0.005	0	N/A	5.56
	Social anxiety	5	−0.18	−0.52 to 0.15	41	0 to 78	9.80
	Specific phobia	3	−0.19	−0.57 to 0.17	14	0 to 91	9.43
Incomplete outcome data RoB^j	High/Unclear	20	0.02	−0.11 to 0.15	5	0 to 50	83.33	0.326
	Low	9	−0.12	−0.36 to 0.12	43	0 to 74	14.71
Depressive symptoms
All studies		13	0.004	−0.20 to 0.21	26	0 to 62	443.11
Outliers excluded^g		12	0.07	−0.10 to 0.25	0	0 to 58	25.00
Only studies with >25 randomized participants per arm		4	−0.03	−0.27 to 0.20	0	0 to 85	62.5
Subgroup analyses
Country	N. America	3	0.14	−0.19 to 0.48	0	0 to 90	12.82	0.410
	EU	9	−0.04	−0.32 to 0.24	40	0 to 72	45.45
VR program author	N	2	0.03	−0.37 to 0.43	0	N/A	62.50	0.901
among author pool	Y	11	−0.001	−0.24 to 0.24	37	0 to 69	1772.4
Recruitment^h	Clinic	6	−0.01	−0.25 to 0.23	0	0 to 75	166.67	0.769
	Community	4	−0.12	−0.79 to 0.55	76	32 to 91	14.71
Control group	CBT	10	0.08	−0.10 to 0.28	0	0 to 62	21.74	0.777
	IE	2	0.02	−0.39 to 0.43	0	N/A	83.33
Experimental	VRCBT	8	0.17	−0.07 to 0.43	0	0 to 68	10.42	0.126
intervention	VRE	5	−0.18	−0.57 to 0.20	62	0 to 86	9.80
Incomplete outcome data RoB	High/Unclear	9	0.08	−0.11 to 0.29	0	0 to 65	21.74	0.308
	Low	4	−0.25	−0.88 to 0.37	70	15 to 90	7.14

^aAll results are reported with Hedges’ g, using a random effects model. Negative effect indicates superiority of the active interventions over the VR-enhanced therapies.
^bThe p levels in this column indicate whether the difference between the ESs in the subgroups is significant. (significant results are marked with italic).
^cOutliers: Kampmann, 2016 St.2; Muhlberger, 2003.
^dSubgroup analysis were conducted using a mixed effects model. Only subgroups with at least 2 studies were included.
^eOne study (Wiederhold, 2001) did not contain information about this moderator.
^fTwo studies (Meyerbroeker, 2013, Robillard, 2010 St2) did not contain information about this moderator.
^gOutliers: Kampmann, 2016 St.2.
^hOne study (Robillard, 2010 St.2) did not contain information about this moderator.
ⁱConfidence intervals around I² cannot be calculated if there are less than 3 groups.
^jRoB: Risk of Bias.

Back to article page

Table 4 VR-enhanced therapy vs. active condition contrast, post-treatment.

Search

Quick links