Brambilla Elena, Petersen Evi, Stendal Karen, Sundling Vibeke, MacIntyre Tadhg E, Calogiuri Giovanna
Centre for Health and Technology, Department of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Drammen, Norway.
Department of Sports, Physical Education and Outdoor Studies, University of South-Eastern Norway, Bø, Norway.
Digit Health. 2024 Mar 25;10:20552076241234639. doi: 10.1177/20552076241234639. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
This study systematically summarizes the extant literature on the impacts of immersive virtual nature (IVN) on nature connectedness in the general population.
Papers were considered eligible if peer-reviewed, in English language, comprising experimental or quasi-experimental trials, including at least one outcome relative to nature connectedness in the general population. Database search was conducted on Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Medline, and GreenFILE (22-28 November 2021). Risk of bias was established by the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Data synthesis was conducted through meta-analysis according with the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Group guidelines.
Six eligible papers (9 studies; n = 730) were selected, in which IVN was compared to non-immersive virtual nature, immersive virtual built environments, non-immersive virtual built environments, and actual nature. The risk of bias was predominantly "low" or of "some concerns." Meta-analyses showed a statistically significant overall effect for the first ( = 0.26; = 0.06-0.45; = 35%) and fourth group ( = -1.98; = -3.21 to -0.75; = 96%), the former in favor of IVN and the latter in favor of actual nature. Subgroup analyses were conducted for the first and second groups of studies to explore possible sources of heterogeneity. The small number of studies available limits the validity of the outcomes of the meta-analyses.
The findings indicate that IVN may be an effective tool for the promotion of nature connectedness, although the evidence in this field is still limited and largely mixed. Recommendations for future research are discussed.
本研究系统总结了关于沉浸式虚拟自然（IVN）对普通人群与自然联系影响的现有文献。
如果论文经过同行评审、为英文、包含实验或准实验性试验，且至少有一项与普通人群与自然联系相关的结果，则被视为符合条件。于2021年11月22日至28日在Scopus、科学网、谷歌学术、Medline和GreenFILE上进行数据库搜索。采用Cochrane RoB 2工具评估偏倚风险。根据Cochrane消费者与传播小组指南，通过荟萃分析进行数据综合。
选取了6篇符合条件的论文（9项研究；n = 730），其中将IVN与非沉浸式虚拟自然、沉浸式虚拟建筑环境、非沉浸式虚拟建筑环境以及实际自然进行了比较。偏倚风险主要为“低”或“有些担忧”。荟萃分析显示，第一组（效应量 = 0.26；95%置信区间 = 0.06 - 0.45；异质性检验I² = 35%）和第四组（效应量 = -1.98；95%置信区间 = -3.21至 -0.75；异质性检验I² = 96%）有统计学意义的总体效应，前者支持IVN，后者支持实际自然。对第一组和第二组研究进行了亚组分析，以探索异质性的可能来源。现有研究数量较少，限制了荟萃分析结果的有效性。
研究结果表明，IVN可能是促进与自然联系的有效工具，尽管该领域的证据仍然有限且大多相互矛盾。讨论了对未来研究的建议。
