| Title |
A Therapy System for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Using a Virtual Agent and Virtual Storytelling to Reconstruct Traumatic Memories
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Systems, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10916-017-0771-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Myrthe L. Tielman, Mark A. Neerincx, Rafael Bidarra, Ben Kybartas, Willem-Paul Brinkman |
| Abstract |
Although post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is well treatable, many people do not get the desired treatment due to barriers to care (such as stigma and cost). This paper presents a system that bridges this gap by enabling patients to follow therapy at home. A therapist is only involved remotely, to monitor progress and serve as a safety net. With this system, patients can recollect their memories in a digital diary and recreate them in a 3D WorldBuilder. Throughout the therapy, a virtual agent is present to inform and guide patients through the sessions, employing an ontology-based question module for recollecting traumatic memories to further elicit a detailed memory recollection. In a usability study with former PTSD patients (n = 4), these questions were found useful for memory recollection. Moreover, the usability of the whole system was rated positively. This system has the potential to be a valuable addition to the spectrum of PTSD treatments, offering a novel type of home therapy assisted by a virtual agent. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 20% |
| Greece | 1 | 10% |
| Italy | 1 | 10% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 204 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 12% |
| Researcher | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 13% |
| Unknown | 76 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 32 | 16% |
| Psychology | 29 | 14% |
| Engineering | 10 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 85 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2017.
All research outputs
#4,702,464
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#152
of 1,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,812
of 313,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#6
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,182 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,685 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.