2023
DOI: 10.1177/00315125231205322
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Test-Retest Reliability of Immersive Virtual Reality Measures of Perceptual-Motor Performance

Gary B. Wilkerson,
Jonathan C. Lansey,
Courtney N. Noblett
et al.

Abstract: Background: The duration, accuracy, and consistency of responses to various types of stimuli are widely accepted as indirect indicators of the efficiency of brain information processing, but current clinical tests appear to lack sufficient sensitivity to detect subtle impairments. Purpose: Immersive virtual reality (VR) offers a new means to acquire measures of perceptual-motor responses to moving visual stimuli that require rapid conflict resolution, but their test-retest reliability has not yet been demonstr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We assessed the speed-accuracy trade-off through the calculation of a rate correct score (RCS) derived from the number of correct responses divided by the 40-trial sum of the elapsed time for arm movements (higher values represent better performance) for both the PL (PL-RCS) and RT (RT-RCS). Intra-class correlation coefficients demonstrating acceptable test-retest reliability has previously been documented for the various neck, arm, and step VR metrics, with the PL-Avg and RT-Avg values ranging from 0.837 to 0.922, the PL-IIV and RT-IIV values ranging from 0.693 to 0.836, and the PL-RCS and RT-RCS values of 0.851 and 0.887, respectively [28].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…We assessed the speed-accuracy trade-off through the calculation of a rate correct score (RCS) derived from the number of correct responses divided by the 40-trial sum of the elapsed time for arm movements (higher values represent better performance) for both the PL (PL-RCS) and RT (RT-RCS). Intra-class correlation coefficients demonstrating acceptable test-retest reliability has previously been documented for the various neck, arm, and step VR metrics, with the PL-Avg and RT-Avg values ranging from 0.837 to 0.922, the PL-IIV and RT-IIV values ranging from 0.693 to 0.836, and the PL-RCS and RT-RCS values of 0.851 and 0.887, respectively [28].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…The 40-trial immersive VR test presented eight different combinations of stimulus initial position, stimulus type, and movement direction. The validity of the test for discrimination between individuals with and without a lifetime history of concussion has been established ( 47 ) and documentation of moderate to excellent test–retest reliability for the various measurements derived from the test ( 50 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%