Skip to content
naulon
Get started

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 18, 2026.

Neuroscience of Virtual Reality: From Virtual Exposure to Embodied Medicine

Giuseppe Riva, Brenda K. Wiederhold, Fabrizia Mantovani

Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking · 2019 · Meta-analysis · CC BY

doi:10.1089/cyber.2017.29099.gri

Abstract

Is virtual reality (VR) already a reality in behavioral health? To answer this question, a meta-review was conducted to assess the meta-analyses and systematic and narrative reviews published in this field in the last twenty-two months. Twenty-five different articles demonstrated the clinical potential of this technology in both the diagnosis and the treatment of mental health disorders: VR compares favorably to existing treatments in anxiety disorders, eating and weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term effects that generalize to the real world. But why is VR so effective? Here, the following answer is suggested: VR shares with the brain the same basic mechanism: embodied simulations. According to neuroscience, to regulate and control the body in the world effectively, the brain creates an embodied simulation of the body in the world used to represent and predict actions, concepts, and emotions. VR works in a similar way: the VR experience tries to predict the sensory consequences of an individual's movements, providing to him/her the same scene he/she will see in the real world. To achieve this, the VR system, like the brain, maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the space around it. If the presence in the body is the outcome of different embodied simulations, concepts are embodied simulations, and VR is an embodied technology, this suggests a new clinical approach discussed in this article: the possibility of altering the experience of the body and facilitating cognitive modeling/change by designing targeted virtual environments able to simulate both the external and the internal world/body.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 18, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Virtual Reality in Behavioral Health: A Meta-Review

This special issue presented and discussed different virtual reality (VR) applications for behavioral health. But is VR already a reality in behavioral health? To answer this question, a meta-review was conducted to assess the meta-analyses and systematic and narrative reviews (see Fig. 1 for the methodology) published in this field in the last 22 months.

Twenty-five different articles (see Table 1 for the articles' list and a summary of their conclusions) demonstrated the clinical potential of this technology in both the diagnosis and the treatment of mental health disorders. Nine articles,,,,,,,, reviewed the available literature on the effectiveness of VR in psychiatric/mental health treatment.

All of the articles suggest that VR is suitable for the treatment of mental health problems and could make an important contribution in many different areas, from anxiety and eating disorders to psychosis and addiction.

The most common use of VR in behavioral health is for exposure therapy (VR exposure [VRE]). VRE is similar to classic exposure therapy,,—the patient is exposed to a graded exposure hierarchy—with the only difference being that VR is substituted for other exposure techniques (e.g., in vivo or imaginal exposure). In the treatment of complex anxiety disorders, the use of VRE is often combined with other techniques such as breathing or relaxation exercises, attentional and autonomic control training, biofeedback,, and/or cognitive restructuring.

Five articles,,, including a meta-analysis,, specifically explored the use of VRE in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The available data show that VR is able to reduce anxiety symptoms significantly in different anxiety disorders: phobias, post-traumatic stress disorders, panic disorder and agoraphobia, social anxiety disorders, psychological stress, and generalized anxiety disorders. The clinical outcome is generally superior to waitlist control conditions and comparable to in vivo exposure-based interventions.

A second group of five articles,,,, evaluated the efficacy of VR in the treatment of eating and weight disorders. In this field, VR is used in two different ways. First, VR cue exposure to critical stimuli (e.g., food or human bodies) allows both a reduction in the level of anxiety elicited by them and disruption of the reconsolidation of negative memories., Second, VR is used to facilitate the update of existing body representations., According to a recent theory, eating and weight disorders may be the outcome of a broader impairment in multisensory body integration that locks the individuals to an old memory of the body. In this view, even if the subject is able to lose weight after a diet, the multisensory impairment does not allow her/him to experience the new body and reduce the level of body dissatisfaction. VR allows a wrong representation of the body to be updated through two different strategies. In the first—“reference frame shifting”,—the subject re-experiences in VR a negative situation related to the body (e.g., teasing) in both the first and third person (e.g., seeing and supporting her/his avatar in the VR world). In the second—“body swapping”,—VR is used to induce the illusory feeling of ownership of a virtual body with a different shape and/or size. Even if the number of available controlled studies is less than for anxiety disorders, the field has rapidly evolved. Specifically, four different randomized controlled trials—one with eating disorders, one with morbid obesity, one with binge-eating, and one with binge-eating and bulimia—have shown after 6-month and 12-month follow-ups that VR had a higher efficacy than the gold standard in the field, that is, cognitive–behavioral therapy.

A third group of three articles,, analyzed the use of VR in pediatric psychology, with a specific focus on VR applications for the assessment of children suspected of having autism spectrum disorder or other neurodevelopmental disorders, (e.g., attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder). In this field, different from the previous ones, the level of clinical evidence available is still low, even if the existing data suggest moderate evidence about the effectiveness of VR-based treatments. In relation to this topic, another article specifically explored the use of VR for the assessment of psychiatric disorders, finding that virtual worlds are able to induce and assess psychiatric symptoms simultaneously, with significant correlations between VR measures and traditional diagnostic tools. Moreover, VR is also effective in assessing cue reactivity: its use is able to increase subjective craving in smokers,, alcohol drinkers, eaters, and cocaine-dependent individuals.

Three final articles explored the use of VR in the assessment and treatment of psychosis and in pain management., For psychosis, the available studies confirm the efficacy of VR for the multimodal assessment of cognitive functioning, including social cognition/competence and hallucinations/paranoid ideations. For treatment, even if the available studies are very promising, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials demonstrating whether VR is more efficacious or efficient than other interventions.

In relation to the use of VR for pain management, older systematic reviews, demonstrated the efficacy of VR distraction for reducing experimental pain, as well as the one generated by burn injury care, chronic pain, and procedural pain. Hence, the first new one focused its analysis on the integrated use of VR with brain stimulation (transcranial direct-current stimulation) in pain management. Again, even if the level of clinical evidence is still low, a study demonstrated the efficacy of this approach in reducing the severity of neuropathic pain and various neuropathic pain subtypes. Finally, the second new one, suggests that VR may have a role in acutely painful procedures, even if further research is required.

Overall, this meta-review indicated that VR is a powerful clinical tool for behavioral health, able to provide effective assessment and treatment options for a variety of mental health disorders. Specifically, the 25 meta-analyses and systematic and narrative reviews indicated that VR compares favorably to existing treatments in anxiety disorders, eating and weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term effects that generalize to the real world. Moreover, they show the potential of VR as assessment tool with practical applications that range from social and cognitive deficits to addiction. Finally, they suggest a clinical potential in the treatment of psychosis and in the pediatric field, even if there is no definitive evidence for or against the use of VR.

The Effectiveness of VR as a Clinical Tool

An open issue not directly addressed by most of these articles is why VR is an effective clinical tool. In many articles, attention is focused on the high level of control and customization allowed by this technology.,,,, VR allows the level of fit between the content of the exposure and the feared stimuli to be optimized. Moreover, using it, the therapist has a total control—limited only by the specific features of the used software—on the contents of the experience. Finally, it offers a safer and more private context for the patient that facilitates his/her engagement.

Another important point suggested by different articles is the level of “presence” provided by the virtual experience. In fact, VR provides a digital place to the individual where he/she can be placed and live a synthetic but realistic experience. As noted by some colleagues, VR can be considered an advanced imaginal system,: an advanced form of imagery that is as effective as reality in inducing experiences and emotions. For example, as demonstrated by a recent meta-analysis, presence and anxiety are associated with each other during VRE therapy for the treatment of anxiety. This allows a level of self-reflectiveness that is both more predictable and controllable than the one offered by reality, but higher than the one provided by memory and imagination. However, presence alone is necessary but not sufficient to achieve benefit from VR therapy. As noted by Price and Anderson, “The results support presence as a conduit that enabled phobic anxiety to be expressed during exposure to a virtual environment. However, presence was not supported as contributing to treatment outcome. This suggests feeling present during exposure may be necessary but not sufficient to achieve benefit from VR exposure.”92(p750)

A new argument that is introduced and discussed in this article is that VR shares with the brain the same basic mechanism: embodied simulations.,

VR as Simulative Technology

An increasingly popular hypothesis—predictive coding—suggests that the brain actively maintains an internal model (simulation) of the body and the space around it, which provides predictions about the expected sensory input and tries to minimize the amount of prediction errors (or “surprise”). An in-depth discussion of these concepts is not offered here because authoritative and thorough accounts have been provided elsewhere. However, herein, the focus is on the concept of simulation introduced by this paradigm to understand better the links between the brain and VR.

One of the main tenets of predictive coding is that to regulate and control the body in the world effectively, the brain creates an embodied simulation of the body in the world. There are two main characteristics of this simulation. First, different from other internal models used in cognitive science—such as Tolman's cognitive maps or Johhson–Laird's internal models—they are simulations of sensory motor experiences. In this view, they include visceral/autonomic (interoceptive), motor (proprioceptive), and sensory (e.g., visual, auditory) information. Second, embodied simulations reactivate multimodal neural networks, which have produced the simulated/expected effect before.

This approach is used not only for actions, but also for concepts and emotions. Specifically, a concept is a group of distributed multimodal “patterns” of activity across different populations of neurons (motor, somatosensory, limbic, and frontal areas) that support a goal achievement., So, the simulation of a concept involves its reenactment in modality-specific brain areas. Moreover, the brain uses emotion concepts to categorize sensations. As underlined by Barrett, “That is, the brain constructs meaning by correctly anticipating (predicting and adjusting to) incoming sensations. Sensations are categorized so that they are (a) actionable in a situated way and therefore (b) meaningful, based on past experience. When past experiences of emotion (e.g., happiness) are used to categorize the predicted sensory array and guide action, then one experiences or perceives that emotion (happiness).”100(p) In this view, the feeling of presence in a space can be considered as an evolutive tool used to track the difference between the predicted sensations and those that are incoming from the sensory world, both externally and internally.,,

VR works in a similar way: it uses computer technology to create a simulated world that individuals can manipulate and explore as if they were in it. In other words, the VR experience tries to predict the sensory consequences of your movements, showing to you the same scene you will see in the real world. Specifically, VR hardware tracks the motion of the user, while VR software adjusts the images on the user's display to reflect the changes produced by the motion in the virtual world. To achieve it, like the brain, the VR system maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the space around it. This prediction is then used to provide the expected sensory input using the VR hardware. Obviously, to be realistic, the VR model tries to mimic the brain model as much as possible: the more the VR model is similar to the brain model, the more the individual feels present in the VR world.,

VR as Embodied Technology

As has just been seen, the brain creates multiple multisensory simulations to predict: (a) upcoming sensory events both inside and outside the body, and (b) the best action to deal with the impending sensory events. Moseley et al. suggested that these simulations are integrated with sensory data in the “body matrix,” a coarse supramodal multisensory representation of the body and the space around it. Specifically, the contents of the body matrix are defined by top-down predictive signals, integrating the multisensory (motor and visceromotor) simulations of the causes of perceived sensory events. The different simulations are then ranked and included in the body matrix according to their relevance for the intentions of the self (selective attention). At the same time, the content and the priority of the different simulations are corrected by bottom-up prediction errors that signal mismatches between predicted and actual contents of sensory events.

At the end of this process, the body matrix defines where the self is present, that is, in the body that our brain considers as the most likely to be its one. As underlined by Apps and Tsakiris, “The mental representation of the physical properties of one's self are, therefore, also probabilistic. That is, one's own body is the one that has the highest probability of being ‘me,’ since other objects are probabilistically less likely to evoke the same sensory inputs. In short, the notion that there is a ‘self’ is the most parsimonious and accurate explanation for sensory inputs.”110(p)

If presence in the body is the outcome of different embodied simulations, and VR is a simulation technology, this suggests the possibility of altering the experience of the body by designing targeted virtual environments. In this view, VR can be defined as an “embodied technology” for its possibility of modifying the embodiment experience of its users. As noted by Riva et al., “using VR, subjects can experience the synthetic environment as if it was ‘their surrounding world’ (incarnation: the physical body is within a virtual environment) or can experience their synthetic avatars as if they were ‘their own body’ (embodiment: the physical body is replaced by the virtual one).”1(p) In other words, VR is able to fool the predictive coding mechanisms used by the brain generating the feeling of presence in a virtual body and in the digital space around it.

Up to now, VR has been used to simulate external reality, that is, to make people feel “real” what is actually not really there (i.e., the environment). However, the ability of VR to fool the predictive coding mechanisms that regulate the experience of the body also allows it to make people feel “real” what they are not. In other words, VR can offer new ways for structuring, augmenting, and/or replacing the experience of the body for clinical goals. Moreover, it may offer new embodied ways for assessing the functioning of the brain, by directly targeting the processes behind real-world behaviors.

But what is the real clinical potential of VR as an embodied technology? According to neuroscience, the body matrix,,, serves to maintain the integrity of the body at both the homeostatic and psychological levels by supervising the cognitive and physiological resources necessary to protect the body and the space around it. Specifically, the body matrix plays a critical role in high-end cognitive processes such as motivation, emotion, social cognition, and self-awareness, while exerting a top-down modulation over basic physiological mechanisms such as thermoregulatory control, and the immune system.

In this view, different authors,,, have recently suggested that an altered functioning of the body matrix and/or its related processes might be the cause of different neurological and psychiatric conditions. If this is true, VR can be the core of a new trans-disciplinary research field—embodied medicine,—the main goal of which is the use of advanced technology for altering the body matrix, with the goal of improving people's health and well-being.

As has been seen in the first section of this article, two different VR embodiment techniques—body swapping, and reference frame shifting,—are currently used in the treatment of eating and weight disorders. The first one, body swapping, replaces the contents of the bodily self-consciousness with synthetic ones (synthetic embodiment). This has been used in eating and weight disorders to improve the experience of the body in both clinical (anorexia and morbid obesity), and non-clinical subjects. Nevertheless, the potential of this approach is wider. For example, it may offer a non-pharmacological way to reduce chronic pain. As has been seen in the first section of this article, VR distraction is effectively used to reduce acute pain. Nevertheless, according to Tsay et al., “available findings present compelling evidence for a novel multisensory and multimodal approach to therapies for chronic pain disorders”137(p249) In this view, the use of VR embodiment may offer new treatment options for pain management. Some studies have suggested the possibility of using VR body swapping to improve body perception disturbance in patients with complex regional pain syndrome.,

The second technique, reference frame shifting, structures the individual's bodily self-consciousness through the focus and reorganization of its contents (mindful embodiment)., It has been successfully used in different randomized trials in patients with eating and weight disorders, to update the contents of their body memory. But again, its applications are probably wider. For example, Osimo et al. integrated body swapping (in the avatar of Sigmund Freud) and reference frame shifting to improve mood and happiness in a non-clinical sample.

A final emerging approach is the use of VR to augment the bodily experience through the awareness of internal (and difficult to sense) bodily information, or the mapping of a sensory channel to a different one—for example vision to touch or to hearing (augmented embodiment)., For example, Suzuki et al. implemented an innovative “cardiac rubber hand illusion” that combined computer-generated augmented reality with feedback of interoceptive information. Their results showed that the virtual-hand ownership is enhanced by cardio-visual feedback in time with the actual heartbeat, supporting the use of this technique to improve emotion regulation.

VR as Cognitive Technology

VR is an embodied technology for its ability to modify the experience of the body. However, the body is not simply an object like any other; it has a special status.,, It is perceived in a multisensory way, from the outside (exteroception, the body perceived through the senses) as well as from within (inner body, including interoception, the sense of the physiological condition of the body; proprioception, the sense of the position of the body/body segments; and vestibular input, the sense of motion of the body) and from memory. This is true also for the simulative code used by the brain for creating concepts. As has been seen before, it integrates visceral/autonomic (interoceptive), motor (proprioceptive), and sensory information. If concepts are embodied simulations, and VR is an embodied technology, it should be possible to facilitate cognitive modeling and change by designing targeted virtual environments able to modify concepts both from outside and from inside.

Nevertheless, there is a critical shortcoming that at the moment is limiting this possibility: VR simulates the external world/body but not the internal one. In fact, actual VR technology is very effective in reproducing the exteroceptive (external) features of the body using vision and hearing, but less effective in reproducing the other senses (i.e., touch and smell). It is partially effective in reproducing the proprioceptive (motor) features of the body using haptic technologies, but it is not yet able to reproduce the interoceptive/vestibular (internal) features of the body.

Recently, Riva et al. introduced the concept of “sonoception,” a novel noninvasive technological paradigm based on wearable acoustic and vibrotactile transducers, as a possible approach to structure, augment, and/or replace the contents of the inner body. This approach should be able to modulate the inner body (interoception, proprioception, and vestibular input) through the stimulation of both mechanoreceptors in different parts of the body—the stomach, the heart, the muscles—and the otolith organs of the vestibular system (see Fig. 2).

The first outcome of an integrated VR platform able to simulate both the external and the inner world is the possibility of structuring, augmenting, and/or replacing all the different experiential aspects of bodily self-consciousness, with clinical applications in the treatment of psychiatric disorders, such as depression, or schizophrenia, and neurological disorders, such as chronic pain, and neglect.,

The final long-term outcome of this possibility may be the embodied virtual training machine described by the science-fiction thriller The Matrix. In this movie, the heroes, Trinity and Neo, learned how to fight martial-arts battles and drive motorcycles and helicopters by experiencing the bodily processes and concepts related to the skill through an embodied simulation.

Conclusions

The first article discussing a VR application in the field of behavioral health was published in 1995. Now, more than 20 years later, VR is a reality in this field. This is the result of a meta-review presented in this article assessing the meta-analyses and systematic and narrative reviews published in this field in the last 22 months. Twenty-five different articles have demonstrated the clinical potential of this technology in both the diagnosis and the treatment of mental health disorders. Specifically, they indicate that VR compares favorably to existing treatments in anxiety disorders, eating and weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term effects that generalize to the real world.

But why is VR so effective? Here, the following answer is suggested: VR shares with the brain the same basic mechanism—embodied simulations.

According to neuroscience, to regulate and control the body in the world effectively, the brain creates an embodied simulation of the body in the world used to represent and predict actions, concepts, and emotions. Specifically, it is used to predict: (a) upcoming sensory events both inside and outside the body, and (b) the best action to deal with the impending sensory events. There are two main characteristics of this simulation. First, it simulates sensory motor experiences, including visceral/autonomic (interoceptive), motor (proprioceptive), and sensory (e.g., visual, auditory) information. Second, embodied simulations reactivate multimodal neural networks which have produced the simulated/expected effect before.

VR works in a similar way: the VR experience tries to predict the sensory consequences of the individual's movements, providing to him/her the same scene he/she will see in the real world. To achieve this, the VR system, like the brain, maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the space around it.

If presence in the body is the outcome of different embodied simulations, and VR is a simulation technology, this suggests the possibility of altering the experience of the body by designing targeted virtual environments. In this view, VR can be defined as an “embodied technology” for its possibility of modifying the embodiment experience of its users. In other words, VR is able to fool the predictive coding mechanisms used by the brain, generating the feeling of presence in a virtual body and in the digital space around it.

Moreover, if concepts are embodied simulations, and VR is an embodied technology, it should be possible to facilitate cognitive modeling and change by designing targeted virtual environments able to modify concepts from both outside and inside.

Nevertheless, at the moment, there is a critical shortcoming that is limiting this possibility: VR simulates the external world/body but not the internal one. Recently, Riva et al. introduced the concept of “sonoception” (www.sonoception.com), a novel noninvasive technological paradigm based on wearable acoustic and vibrotactile transducers able to stimulate both mechanoreceptors in different parts of the body—the stomach, the heart, the muscles—and the otolith organs of the vestibular system (see Fig. 2). The first outcome of this approach is the development of an interoceptive stimulator that is both able to assess interoceptive time perception in clinical patients and to enhance heart rate variability (the short-term vagally mediated component—rMSSD) through the modulation of the subjects' parasympathetic system. The integration of these technologies with VR in a multisensory simulative platform will allow the modulation of both the external and internal bodily information, to structure, augment and/or replace the contents of our bodily self-consciousness.

In conclusion, even if VR is already a reality in behavioral health, the possibility of using it to simulate both the external and internal world may open new clinical options in the near future able to target the experience of the body and its related processes directly. Psychosomatics is an interdisciplinary field that explores the relationships between psychosocial, behavioral factors, and bodily processes. The long-term goal of the vision presented in this article is the use of simulative technologies—both simulating the external world and the internal one—to reverse engineer the psychosomatic processes that connect mind and body. If achieved, this perspective will provide a radically new meaning to the classical Juvenal's Latin dictum “Mens sana in corpore sano” (a healthy mind in a healthy body) by allowing a new trans-disciplinary research field—“Embodied Medicine”,—that will use advanced multisensory technologies to alter bodily processes for enhancing homeostasis and well-being.

References 162

  1. 1.
    Transforming Experience: The Potential of Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality for Enhancing Personal and Clinical Change · 2016
    No notice
  2. 2.
    Virtual reality in the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental health disorders · 2017
    No notice
  3. 3.

    Riva G Letter to the editor: virtual reality in the treatment of eating and weight disorders. Psychological Medicine 2017; 47:2567–2568

    Not in our library10.1017/s0033291717001441

  4. 4.

    van Bennekom MJ, de Koning PP, Denys D Virtual reality objectifies the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders: a literature review. Frontiers in Psychiatry 2017; 8:163

    Not in our library10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00163

  5. 5.

    Lindner P, Miloff A, Hamilton W, et al. Creating state of the art, next-generation virtual reality exposure therapies for anxiety disorders using consumer hardware platforms: design considerations and future directions. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy 2017; 46:404–420

    Not in our library10.1080/16506073.2017.1280843

  6. 6.

    Massetti T, Crocetta TB, Silva TDD, et al. Application and outcomes of therapy combining transcranial direct current stimulation and virtual reality: a systematic review. Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2017; 12:551–559

    Not in our library10.1080/17483107.2016.1230152

  7. 7.

    Rus-Calafell M, Garety P, Sason E, et al. Virtual reality in the assessment and treatment of psychosis: a systematic review of its utility, acceptability and effectiveness. Psychological Medicine 2017; 48:362–391

    Not in our library10.1017/s0033291717001945

  8. 8.

    Botella C, Fernández-Álvarez J, Guillén V, et al. Recent progress in virtual reality exposure therapy for phobias: a systematic review. Current Psychiatry Reports 2017; 19:42

    Not in our library10.1007/s11920-017-0788-4

  9. 9.

    Maples-Keller JL, Bunnell BE, Kim SJ, et al. The use of virtual reality technology in the treatment of anxiety and other psychiatric disorders. Harvard Review of Psychiatry 2017; 25:103–113

    Not in our library10.1097/hrp.0000000000000138

  10. 10.

    Maples-Keller JL, Yasinski C, Manjin N, et al. Virtual reality-enhanced extinction of phobias and post-traumatic stress. Neurotherapeutics 2017; 14:554–563

    Not in our library10.1007/s13311-017-0534-y

  11. 11.

    Cardoş RAI, David OA, David DO Virtual reality exposure therapy in flight anxiety: a quantitative meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior 2017; 72:371–380

    Not in our library

  12. 12.

    Castelnuovo G, Pietrabissa G, Manzoni GM, et al. Cognitive behavioral therapy to aid weight loss in obese patients: current perspectives. Psychology Research & Behavior Management 2017; 10:165–173

    Not in our library10.2147/prbm.s113278

  13. 13.

    Paul L, Van Der Heiden C, Hoek HW Cognitive behavioral therapy and predictors of weight loss in bariatric surgery patients. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 2017; 30:474–479

    Not in our library10.1097/yco.0000000000000359

  14. 14.

    Dascal J, Reid M, Ishak WW, et al. Virtual reality and medical inpatients: a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience 2017; 14:14–21

    Not in our library

  15. 15.

    Li L, Yu F, Shi D, et al. Application of virtual reality technology in clinical medicine. American Journal of Translational Research 2017; 9:3867–3880

    Not in our library

  16. 16.

    Arroll B, Wallace HB, Mount V, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for acrophobia. The Medical Journal of Australia 2017; 206:263–267

    Not in our library10.5694/mja16.00540

  17. 17.

    de Carvalho M, Dias T, Duchesne M, et al. Virtual reality as a promising strategy in the assessment and treatment of bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder: a systematic review. Behavioral Sciences 2017; 7:43

    Not in our library10.3390/bs7030043

  18. 18.

    Pourmand A, Davis S, Lee D, et al. Emerging utility of virtual reality as a multidisciplinary tool in clinical medicine. Games for Health Journal 2017; 6:263–270

    Not in our library10.1089/g4h.2017.0046

  19. 19.

    Mishkind MC, Norr AM, Katz AC, et al. Review of virtual reality treatment in psychiatry: evidence versus current diffusion and use. Current Psychiatry Reports 2017; 19:80

    Not in our library10.1007/s11920-017-0836-0

  20. 20.

    Duffield TC, Parsons TD, Landry A, et al. Virtual environments as an assessment modality with pediatric ASD populations: a brief report. Child Neuropsychology 2017 9 13 [Epub ahead of print]

    Not in our library10.1080/09297049.2017.1375473

  21. 21.

    Parsons TD, Riva G, Parsons S, et al. Virtual reality in pediatric psychology. Pediatrics 2017; 140:S86–S91

    Not in our library10.1542/peds.2016-1758i

  22. 22.

    Jerdan SW, Grindle M, van Woerden HC, Kamel Boulos MN Head-mounted virtual reality and mental health: critical review of current research. JMIR Serious Games 2018; 6:e14

    Not in our library10.2196/games.9226

  23. 23.

    Clus D, Larsen ME, Lemey C, Berrouiguet S The use of virtual reality in patients with eating disorders: systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2018; 20:e157

    Not in our library10.2196/jmir.7898

  24. 24.
    Effectiveness of Virtual Reality for Children and Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review · 2018
    No notice
  25. 25.
    Clinical efficacy of virtual reality for acute procedural pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis · 2018
    No notice
  26. 26.

    Rothbaum BO, Rizzo AS, Difede J Virtual reality exposure therapy for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2010; 1208:126–132

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05691.x

  27. 27.

    Wiederhold BK, Wiederhold MD Three-year follow-up for virtual reality exposure for fear of flying. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2003; 6:441–445

    Not in our library10.1089/109493103322278844

  28. 28.

    McLay RN, Wood DP, Webb-Murphy JA, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of virtual reality-graded exposure therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder in active duty service members with combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2011; 14:223–239

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2011.0003

  29. 29.

    Repetto C, Gorini A, Vigna C, et al. The use of biofeedback in clinical virtual reality: the INTREPID project. Journal of Visualized Experiments 2009 11 12 [Epub ahead of print]

    Not in our library10.3791/1554

  30. 30.

    Wiederhold BK, Wiederhold MD Clinical observations during virtual reality therapy for specific phobias. CyberPsychology & Behavior 1999; 2:161–168

    Not in our library10.1089/cpb.1999.2.161

  31. 31.

    Rothbaum BO, Hodges L, Smith S, et al. A controlled study of virtual reality exposure therapy for the fear of flying. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 2000; 68:1020–1026

    Not in our library10.1037//0022-006x.68.6.1020

  32. 32.

    Parsons TD, Rizzo AA Affective outcomes of virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety and specific phobias: a meta-analysis. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry 2008; 39:250–261

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jbtep.2007.07.007

  33. 33.
    Efficacy of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy in the Treatment of PTSD: A Systematic Review · 2012
    No notice
  34. 34.

    Botella C, Garcìa-Palacios A, Villa H, et al. Virtual reality exposure in the treatment of panic disorder and agoraphobia: a controlled study. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy 2007; 14:164–175

    Not in our library

  35. 35.

    Anderson PL, Price M, Edwards SM, et al. Virtual reality exposure therapy for social anxiety disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 2013; 81:751–760

    Not in our library10.1037/a0033559

  36. 36.

    Gaggioli A, Pallavicini F, Morganti L, et al. Experiential virtual scenarios with real-time monitoring (interreality) for the management of psychological stress: a block randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2014; 16:e167

    Not in our library10.2196/jmir.3235

  37. 37.

    Repetto C, Gaggioli A, Pallavicini F, et al. Virtual reality and mobile phones in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorders: a Phase-2 clinical trial. Personal & Ubiquitous Computing 2013; 17:253–260

    Not in our library

  38. 38.

    Wiederhold BK, Riva G, Gutierrez-Maldonado J Virtual reality in the assessment and treatment of weight-related disorders. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2016; 19:67–73

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2016.0012

  39. 39.

    Pla-Sanjuanelo J, Ferrer-García M, Vilalta-Abella F, et al. Testing virtual reality-based cue-exposure software: which cue-elicited responses best discriminate between patients with eating disorders and healthy controls? Eating and Weight Disorders 2017 7 27 [Epub ahead of print]

    Not in our library10.1007/s40519-017-0419-4

  40. 40.

    Ferrer-Garcia M, Gutierrez-Maldonado J, Pla-Sanjuanelo J, et al. A randomised controlled comparison of second-level treatment approaches for treatment-resistant adults with bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder: assessing the benefits of virtual reality cue exposure therapy. European Eating Disorders Review 2017; 25:479–490

    Not in our library10.1002/erv.2538

  41. 41.

    Riva G Modifications of body image induced by virtual reality. Perceptual & Motor Skills 1998; 86:163–170

    Not in our library10.2466/pms.1998.86.1.163

  42. 42.

    Riva G, Bacchetta M, Baruffi M, et al. Virtual reality-based experiential cognitive treatment of obesity and binge-eating disorders. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy 2000; 7:209–219

    Not in our library

  43. 43.

    Riva G, Gaudio S Locked to a wrong body: eating disorders as the outcome of a primary disturbance in multisensory body integration. Consciousness & Cognition 2018; 59:57–59

    Not in our library10.1016/j.concog.2017.08.006

  44. 44.

    Riva G, Gaudio S, Dakanalis A The neuropsychology of self objectification. European Psychologist 2015; 20:34–43

    Not in our library

  45. 45.

    Riva G Out of my real body: cognitive neuroscience meets eating disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2014; 8:236

    Not in our library10.3389/fnhum.2014.00236

  46. 46.

    Riva G Neuroscience and eating disorders: the allocentric lock hypothesis. Medical Hypotheses 2012; 78:254–257

    Not in our library10.1016/j.mehy.2011.10.039

  47. 47.

    Serino S, Dakanalis A, Gaudio S, et al. Out of body, out of space: impaired reference frame processing in eating disorders. Psychiatry Research 2015; 230:732–734

    Not in our library10.1016/j.psychres.2015.10.025

  48. 48.
    Altered Processing and Integration of Multisensory Bodily Representations and Signals in Eating Disorders: A Possible Path Toward the Understanding of Their Underlying Causes · 2018
    Not checked
  49. 49.

    Akhtar S, Justice LV, Loveday C, et al. Switching memory perspective. Consciousness & Cognition 2017; 56:50–57

    Not in our library10.1016/j.concog.2017.10.006

  50. 50.

    Riva G The key to unlocking the virtual body: virtual reality in the treatment of obesity and eating disorders. Journal of Diabetes Science & Technology 2011; 5:283–292

    Not in our library10.1177/193229681100500213

  51. 51.

    Normand JM, Giannopoulos E, Spanlang B, et al. Multisensory stimulation can induce an illusion of larger belly size in immersive virtual reality. Plos One 2011; 6:e16128

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0016128

  52. 52.

    Gutiérrez-Maldonado J, Wiederhold BK, Riva G Future directions: how virtual reality can further improve the assessment and treatment of eating disorders and obesity. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2016; 19:148–153

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2015.0412

  53. 53.

    Marco JH, Perpina C, Botella C Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy supported by virtual reality in the treatment of body image in eating disorders: one year follow-up. Psychiatry Research 2013; 209:619–625

    Not in our library10.1016/j.psychres.2013.02.023

  54. 54.

    Manzoni GM, Cesa GL, Bacchetta M, et al. Virtual reality-enhanced cognitive–behavioral therapy for morbid obesity: a randomized controlled study with 1 year follow-up. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2016; 19:134–140

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2015.0208

  55. 55.

    Cesa GL, Manzoni GM, Bacchetta M, et al. Virtual reality for enhancing the cognitive behavioral treatment of obesity with binge eating disorder: randomized controlled study with one-year follow-up. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2013; 15:e113

    Not in our library10.2196/jmir.2441

  56. 56.

    Marta F-G, Joana P-S, Antonios D, et al. A randomized trial of virtual reality-based cue exposure second-level therapy and cognitive behavior second-level therapy for bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder: outcome at six-month followup. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2018 7 30 [Epub ahead of print]

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2017.0675

  57. 57.

    Parsons S Authenticity in virtual reality for assessment and intervention in autism: a conceptual review. Educational Research Review 2016; 19:138–157

    Not in our library

  58. 58.

    Negut A, Jurma AM, David D Virtual-reality-based attention assessment of ADHD: ClinicaVR: classroom-CPT versus a traditional continuous performance test. Child Neuropsychology 2017; 23:692–712

    Not in our library10.1080/09297049.2016.1186617

  59. 59.

    Pollak Y, Weiss PL, Rizzo AA, et al. The utility of a continuous performance test embedded in virtual reality in measuring ADHD-related deficits. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics 2009; 30:2–6

    Not in our library10.1097/dbp.0b013e3181969b22

  60. 60.

    Hone-Blanchet A, Wensing T, Fecteau S The use of virtual reality in craving assessment and cue-exposure therapy in substance use disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2014; 8:844

    Not in our library10.3389/fnhum.2014.00844

  61. 61.

    Bordnick PS, Graap KM, Copp HL, et al. Virtual reality cue reactivity assessment in cigarette smokers. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2005; 8:487–492

    Not in our library10.1089/cpb.2005.8.487

  62. 62.

    Lee J, Lim Y, Graham SJ, et al. Nicotine craving and cue exposure therapy by using virtual environments. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2004; 7:705–713

    Not in our library10.1089/cpb.2004.7.705

  63. 63.

    Bordnick PS, Traylor A, Copp HL, et al. Assessing reactivity to virtual reality alcohol based cues. Addictive Behaviors 2008; 33:743–756

    Not in our library10.1016/j.addbeh.2007.12.010

  64. 64.

    Ledoux T, Nguyen AS, Bakos-Block C, et al. Using virtual reality to study food cravings. Appetite 2013; 71:396–402

    Not in our library10.1016/j.appet.2013.09.006

  65. 65.

    Saladin ME, Brady KT, Graap K, et al. A preliminary report on the use of virtual reality technology to elicit craving and cue reactivity in cocaine dependent individuals. Addictive Behaviors 2006; 31:1881–1894

    Not in our library10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.01.004

  66. 66.

    Gutiérrez-Maldonado J, Rus-Calafell M, Marquez-Rejón S, et al. Associations between facial emotion recognition, cognition and alexithymia in patients with schizophrenia: comparison of photographic and virtual reality presentations. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics 2012; 181:88–92

    Not in our library

  67. 67.

    Stinson K, Valmaggia LR, Antley A, et al. Cognitive triggers of auditory hallucinations: an experimental investigation. Journal of Behavioral Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry 2010; 41:179–184

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jbtep.2009.12.003

  68. 68.
    Virtual reality in the treatment of persecutory delusions: Randomised controlled experimental study testing how to reduce delusional conviction · 2016
    No notice
  69. 69.

    Gega L, White R, Clarke T, et al. Virtual environments using video capture for social phobia with psychosis. Cyberpsychogy, Behavior, & Social Networking 2013; 16:473–479

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2013.1510

  70. 70.

    Leff J, Williams G, Huckvale MA, et al. Computer-assisted therapy for medication-resistant auditory hallucinations: proof-of-concept study. British Journal of Psychiatry 2013; 202:428–433

    Not in our library10.1192/bjp.bp.112.124883

  71. 71.

    Malloy KM, Milling LS The effectiveness of virtual reality distraction for pain reduction: a systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review 2010; 30:1011–1018

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cpr.2010.07.001

  72. 72.

    Morris LD, Louw QA, Grimmer-Somers K The effectiveness of virtual reality on reducing pain and anxiety in burn injury patients: a systematic review. The Clinical Journal of Pain 2009; 25:815–826

    Not in our library10.1097/ajp.0b013e3181aaa909

  73. 73.

    Wiederhold BK, Soomro A, Riva G, et al. Future directions: advances and implications of virtual environments designed for pain management. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:414–422

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2014.0197

  74. 74.

    Sulea C, Soomro A, Boyd C, et al. Pain management in virtual reality: a comprehensive research chart. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:402–413

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2014.1514

  75. 75.

    Li A, Montano Z, Chen VJ, et al. Virtual reality and pain management: current trends and future directions. Pain Management 2011; 1:147–157

    Not in our library10.2217/pmt.10.15

  76. 76.

    Keefe FJ, Huling DA, Coggins MJ, et al. Virtual reality for persistent pain: a new direction for behavioral pain management. Pain 2012; 153:2163–2166

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pain.2012.05.030

  77. 77.

    Schmitt YS, Hoffman HG, Blough DK, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of immersive virtual reality analgesia, during physical therapy for pediatric burns. Burns 2011; 37:61–68

    Not in our library10.1016/j.burns.2010.07.007

  78. 78.

    Hoffman HG, Richards TL, Coda B, et al. Modulation of thermal pain-related brain activity with virtual reality: evidence from fMRI. Neuroreport 2004; 15:1245–1248

    Not in our library10.1097/01.wnr.0000127826.73576.91

  79. 79.

    Hoffman HG, Richards TL, Van Oostrom T, et al. The analgesic effects of opioids and immersive virtual reality distraction: evidence from subjective and functional brain imaging assessments. Anesthesia & Analgesia 2007; 105:1776–1783, table of contents.

    Not in our library10.1213/01.ane.0000270205.45146.db

  80. 80.

    Wiederhold BK, Gao K, Sulea C, et al. Virtual reality as a distraction technique in chronic pain patients. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:346–352

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2014.0207

  81. 81.

    Parsons TD, Trost Z (2014 ) Virtual reality graded exposure therapy as treatment for pain-related fear and disability in chronic pain. In Ma M, Jain L, Anderson P, eds. Virtual, augmented reality and serious games for healthcare 1. Intelligent Systems Reference Library, vol. 68. Berlin: Springer, pp. 523–546

    Not in our library

  82. 82.

    Jin W, Choo A, Gromala D, et al. A virtual reality game for chronic pain management: a randomized, controlled clinical study. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics 2016; 220:154–160

    Not in our library

  83. 83.

    Hua Y, Qiu R, Yao WY, et al. The effect of virtual reality distraction on pain relief during dressing changes in children with chronic wounds on lower limbs. Pain Management Nursing 2015; 16:685–691

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pmn.2015.03.001

  84. 84.

    Wiederhold MD, Gao K, Wiederhold BK Clinical use of virtual reality distraction system to reduce anxiety and pain in dental procedures. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:359–365

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2014.0203

  85. 85.

    Mosso-Vazquez JL, Gao K, Wiederhold BK, et al. Virtual reality for pain management in cardiac surgery. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:371–378

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2014.0198

  86. 86.

    Soler MD, Kumru H, Pelayo R, et al. Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation and visual illusion on neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury. Brain 2010; 133:2565–2577

    Not in our library10.1093/brain/awq184

  87. 87.

    Pallavicini F, Ferrari A, Zini A, et al. (2017 ) What distinguishes a traditional gaming experience from one in virtual reality? An exploratory study. In Ahram T, Falcão C, eds. Advances in human factors in wearable technologies and game design. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, pp. 225–231

    Not in our library

  88. 88.

    Riva G, Botella C, Baños R, et al. (2015 ) Presence-inducing media for mental health applications. In Lombard M, Biocca F, Freeman J, et al., eds. Immersed in media. New York: Springer, pp. 283–332

    Not in our library

  89. 89.

    Vincelli F, Riva G Virtual reality as a new imaginative tool in psychotherapy. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics 2000; 70:356–358

    Not in our library

  90. 90.

    Riva G, Molinari E, Vincelli F Interaction and presence in the clinical relationship: virtual reality (VR) as communicative medium between patient and therapist. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 2002; 6:198–205

    Not in our library10.1109/titb.2002.802370

  91. 91.

    Ling Y, Nefs HT, Morina N, et al. A meta-analysis on the relationship between self-reported presence and anxiety in virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety disorders. PLoS One 2014; 9:e96144

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0096144

  92. 92.

    Price M, Anderson P The role of presence in virtual reality exposure therapy. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 2007; 21:742–751

    Not in our library10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.11.002

  93. 93.

    Riva G. The neuroscience of body memory: from the self through the space to the others. Cortex 2017 7 25 [Epub ahead of print]

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cortex.2017.07.013

  94. 94.

    Friston K The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2010; 11:127–138

    Not in our library10.1038/nrn2787

  95. 95.

    Friston K Embodied inference and spatial cognition. Cognitive Processing 2012; 13:S171–177

    Not in our library10.1007/s10339-012-0519-z

  96. 96.

    Clark A Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral & Brain Sciences 2013; 36:181–204

    Not in our library10.1017/s0140525x12000477

  97. 97.
    Predictive coding and multisensory integration: an attentional account of the multisensory mind · 2015
    No notice
  98. 98.

    Hohwy J (2013 ) The predictive mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press

    Not in our library

  99. 99.

    Clark A (2016 ) Surfing uncertainty: prediction, action, and the embodied mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press

    Not in our library

  100. 100.

    Barrett LF The theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization. Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience 2017; 12:1–23

    Not in our library10.1093/scan/nsw154

  101. 101.

    Barsalou LW Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language & Cognitive Processes 2003; 18:513–562

    Not in our library

  102. 102.

    Riva G, Waterworth JA, Waterworth EL, et al. From intention to action: the role of presence. New Ideas in Psychology 2011; 29:24–37

    Not in our library

  103. 103.

    Riva G, Mantovani F From the body to the tools and back: a general framework for presence in mediated interactions. Interacting with Computers 2012; 24:203–210

    Not in our library

  104. 104.

    Sanchez-Vives MV, Slater M From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2005; 6:332–339

    Not in our library10.1038/nrn1651

  105. 105.

    Moseley GL, Gallace A, Spence C Bodily illusions in health and disease: physiological and clinical perspectives and the concept of a cortical “body matrix.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2012; 36:34–46

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.03.013

  106. 106.

    Gallace A, Spence C (2014 ) In touch with the future: the sense of touch from cognitive neuroscience to virtual reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press

    Not in our library

  107. 107.

    Sedda A, Tonin D, Salvato G, et al. Left caloric vestibular stimulation as a tool to reveal implicit and explicit parameters of body representation. Consciousness & Cognition 2016; 41:1–9

    Not in our library10.1016/j.concog.2016.01.012

  108. 108.

    Friston K, Daunizeau J, Kilner J, et al. Action and behavior: a free-energy formulation. Biological Cybernetics 2010; 102:227–260

    Not in our library10.1007/s00422-010-0364-z

  109. 109.

    Friston K The free-energy principle: a rough guide to the brain? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2009; 13:293–301

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tics.2009.04.005

  110. 110.

    Apps MA, Tsakiris M The free-energy self: a predictive coding account of self-recognition. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2014; 41:85–97

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.01.029

  111. 111.

    Holmes NP, Spence C The body schema and the multisensory representation(s) of peripersonal space. Cognitive Processing 2004; 5:94–105

    Not in our library10.1007/s10339-004-0013-3

  112. 112.

    Serino S, Scarpina F, Dakanalis A, et al. The role of age on multisensory bodily experience: an experimental study with a virtual reality full-body illusion. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2018; 21:304–310

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2017.0674

  113. 113.

    Oliveira ECD, Bertrand P, Lesur MER, et al. Virtual body swap: a new feasible tool to be explored in health and education. In 2016 XVIII Symposium on Virtual and Augmented Reality (SVR 2016). New York: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 81–89

    Not in our library

  114. 114.

    Riva G From virtual to real body: virtual reality as embodied technology. Journal of Cybertherapy & Rehabiliation 2008; 1:7–22

    Not in our library

  115. 115.

    Riva G (2016 ) Embodied medicine: what human computer confluence can offer to health care. In Gaggioli A, Ferscha A, Riva G, et al., eds. Human computer confluence: transforming human experience through symbiotic technologies. Warsaw, Poland: De Gruyter Open, pp. 55–79

    Not in our library

  116. 116.

    Riva G, Serino S, Di Lernia D, et al. Embodied medicine: mens sana in corpore virtuale sano. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2017; 11:120

    Not in our library10.3389/fnhum.2017.00120

  117. 117.
    Virtual Reality for Enhanced Ecological Validity and Experimental Control in the Clinical, Affective and Social Neurosciences · 2015
    No notice
  118. 118.

    Parsons T, Gaggioli A, Riva G Virtual reality for research in social neuroscience. Brain Sciences 2017; 7:42

    Not in our library10.3390/brainsci7040042

  119. 119.

    Serino S, Baglio F, Rossetto F, et al. Picture Interpretation Test (PIT) 360°: an innovative measure of executive functions. Scientific Reports 2017; 7:16000

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-017-16121-x

  120. 120.
    Modeling Behavior Dynamics using Computational Psychometrics within Virtual Worlds · 2015
    Not checked
  121. 121.

    Cipresso P, Serino S, Riva G Psychometric assessment and behavioral experiments using a free virtual reality platform and computational science. BMC Medical Informatics & Decision Making 2016; 16:37

    Not in our library10.1186/s12911-016-0276-5

  122. 122.

    Finotti G, Migliorati D, Costantini M Multisensory integration, bodily self-consciousness and disorders of the immune system. Brain, Behavior, & Immunity 2015; 49:e31

    Not in our library

  123. 123.

    Finotti G, Costantini M Multisensory body representation in autoimmune diseases. Scientific Reports 2016; 6:21074

    Not in our library10.1038/srep21074

  124. 124.
    The multisensory basis of the self: From body to identity to others · 2017
    No notice
  125. 125.

    Maister L, Slater M, Sanchez-Vives MV, et al. Changing bodies changes minds: owning another body affects social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2015; 19:6–12

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tics.2014.11.001

  126. 126.

    Maister L, Sebanz N, Knoblich G, et al. Experiencing ownership over a dark-skinned body reduces implicit racial bias. Cognition 2013; 128:170–178

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cognition.2013.04.002

  127. 127.

    Macauda G, Bertolini G, Palla A, et al. Binding body and self in visuo-vestibular conflicts. European Journal of Neuroscience 2015; 41:810–817

    Not in our library10.1111/ejn.12809

  128. 128.
    Temporary interference over the posterior parietal cortices disrupts thermoregulatory control in humans. · 2014
    Not checked
  129. 129.

    Brugger P, Lenggenhager B The bodily self and its disorders: neurological, psychological and social aspects. Current Opinion in Neurology 2014; 27:644–652

    Not in our library10.1097/wco.0000000000000151

  130. 130.

    Tsakiris M, Critchley H Interoception beyond homeostasis: affect, cognition and mental health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 2016; 371

    Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2016.0002

  131. 131.
    A Virtual Reality Full Body Illusion Improves Body Image Disturbance in Anorexia Nervosa · 2016
    No notice
  132. 132.

    Serino S, Scarpina F, Keizer A, et al. A novel technique for improving bodily experience in a non-operable super-super obesity case. Frontiers in Psychology 2016; 7:837

    Not in our library10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00837

  133. 133.

    Serino S, Pedroli E, Keizer A, et al. Virtual reality body swapping: a tool for modifying the allocentric memory of the body. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2016; 19:127–133

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2015.0229

  134. 134.

    Preston C, Ehrsson HH Illusory changes in body size modulate body satisfaction in a way that is related to non-clinical eating disorder psychopathology. Plos One 2014; 9:e85773

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0085773

  135. 135.

    Preston C, Ehrsson HH Illusory obesity triggers body dissatisfaction responses in the insula and anterior cingulate cortex. Cerebral Cortex 2016; 26:4450–4460

    Not in our library10.1093/cercor/bhw313

  136. 136.

    Serino S, Dakanalis A Bodily illusions and weight-related disorders: clinical insights from experimental research. Annals of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine 2017; 60:217–219

    Not in our library10.1016/j.rehab.2016.10.002

  137. 137.

    Tsay A, Allen TJ, Proske U, et al. Sensing the body in chronic pain: a review of psychophysical studies implicating altered body representation. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2015; 52:221–232

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.03.004

  138. 138.

    Romano D, Llobera J, Blanke O Size and viewpoint of an embodied virtual body impact the processing of painful stimuli. Journal of Pain 2016; 17:350–358

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jpain.2015.11.005

  139. 139.

    Pazzaglia M, Haggard P, Scivoletto G, et al. Pain and somatic sensation are transiently normalized by illusory body ownership in a patient with spinal cord injury. Restorative Neurology & Neuroscience 2016; 34:603–613

    Not in our library10.3233/rnn-150611

  140. 140.

    Sarig Bahat H, Takasaki H, Chen XQ, et al. Cervical kinematic training with and without interactive VR training for chronic neck pain—a randomized clinical trial. Manual Therapy 2015; 20:68–78

    Not in our library10.1016/j.math.2014.06.008

  141. 141.

    Hwang H, Cho S, Lee JH The effect of virtual body swapping with mental rehearsal on pain intensity and body perception disturbance in complex regional pain syndrome. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 2014; 37:167–172

    Not in our library10.1097/mrr.0000000000000053

  142. 142.

    Jeon B, Cho S, Lee JH Application of virtual body swapping to patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a pilot study. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:366–370

    Not in our library10.1089/cyber.2014.0046

  143. 143.

    Osimo SA, Pizarro R, Spanlang B, et al. Conversations between self and self as Sigmund Freud—a virtual body ownership paradigm for self counselling. Scientific Reports 2015; 5

    Not in our library10.1038/srep13899

  144. 144.

    Waterworth JA, Waterworth EL (2014 ) Altered, expanded and distributed embodiment: the three stages of interactive presence. In Riva G, Waterworth JA, Murray D, eds. Interacting with presence: HCI and the sense of presence in computer-mediated environments. Berlin: De Gruyter Open, pp. 36–50

    Not in our library

  145. 145.

    Duquette P Increasing our insular world view: interoception and psychopathology for psychotherapists. Frontiers in Neuroscience 2017; 11:135

    Not in our library10.3389/fnins.2017.00135

  146. 146.

    Suzuki K, Garfinkel SN, Critchley HD, et al. Multisensory integration across exteroceptive and interoceptive domains modulates self-experience in the rubber-hand illusion. Neuropsychologia 2013; 51:2909–2917

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.08.014

  147. 147.

    Aspell JE, Lenggenhager B, Blanke O (2012 ) Multisensory perception and bodily self-consciousness. From out-of-body to inside-body experience. In Murray MM, Wallace MT, eds. The neural bases of multisensory processes. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, ch. 24

    Not in our library

  148. 148.

    Blanke O Multisensory brain mechanisms of bodily self-consciousness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2012; 13:556–571

    Not in our library10.1038/nrn3292

  149. 149.

    Serrano B, Baños RM, Botella C Virtual reality and stimulation of touch and smell for inducing relaxation: a randomized controlled trial. Computers in Human Behavior 2016; 55:1–8

    Not in our library

  150. 150.

    Adams RJ, Hannaford B Control law design for haptic interfaces to virtual reality. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 2002; 10:3–13

    Not in our library

  151. 151.

    Barrett LF, Quigley KS, Hamilton P An active inference theory of allostasis and interoception in depression. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 2016; 371

    Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2016.0011

  152. 152.

    Wheatley J, Brewin CR, Patel T, et al. I'll believe it when I can see it: imagery rescripting of intrusive sensory memories in depression. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry 2007; 38:371–385

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jbtep.2007.08.005

  153. 153.

    Postmes L, Sno HN, Goedhart S, et al. Schizophrenia as a self-disorder due to perceptual incoherence. Schizophrenia Research 2014; 152:41–50

    Not in our library10.1016/j.schres.2013.07.027

  154. 154.

    Ferri F, Costantini M, Salone A, et al. Upcoming tactile events and body ownership in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research 2014; 152:51–57

    Not in our library10.1016/j.schres.2013.06.026

  155. 155.

    Klaver M, Dijkerman HC Bodily experience in schizophrenia: factors underlying a disturbed sense of body ownership. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2016; 10:305

    Not in our library10.3389/fnhum.2016.00305

  156. 156.

    Di Lernia D, Serino S, Riva G Pain in the body. Altered interoception in chronic pain conditions: A systematic review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2016; 71:328–341

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.015

  157. 157.

    Bolognini N, Convento S, Casati C, et al. Multisensory integration in hemianopia and unilateral spatial neglect: evidence from the sound induced flash illusion. Neuropsychologia 2016; 87:134–143

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.05.015

  158. 158.

    Lenggenhager B, Loetscher T, Kavan N, et al. Paradoxical extension into the contralesional hemispace in spatial neglect. Cortex 2012; 48:1320–1328

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cortex.2011.10.003

  159. 159.

    Rothbaum BO, Hodges LF, Kooper R, et al. Effectiveness of computer-generated (virtual reality) graded exposure in the treatment of acrophobia. American Journal of Psychiatry 1995; 152:626–628

    Not in our library10.1176/ajp.152.4.626

  160. 160.

    Di Lernia D, Serino S, Pezzulo G, et al. Feel the time. Time perception as a function of interoceptive processing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2018; 12:74

    Not in our library10.3389/fnhum.2018.00074

  161. 161.

    Di Lernia D, Cipresso P, Pedroli E, Riva G Toward an embodied medicine: a portable device with programmable interoceptive stimulation for heart rate variability enhancement. Sensors 2018; 18:pii:

    Not in our library10.3390/s18082469

  162. 162.

    Uman LS Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 2011; 20:57–59

    Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 3

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.