ObReco-2: Two-step validation of a tool to assess memory deficits using 360° videos

Abstract

Traditional neuropsychological evaluations are usually carried out using psychometric paper and pencil tests. Nevertheless, there is a continuous discussion concerning their efficacy to capture life-like abilities. The introduction of new technologies, such as Virtual Reality (VR) and 360° spherical photos and videos, has improved the ecological validity of the neuropsychological assessment. The possibility of simulating realistic environments and situations allows clinicians to evaluate patients in realistic activities. Moreover, 360° photos and videos seem to provide higher levels of graphical realism and technical user-friendliness compared to standard VR, regardless of their limitations in terms of interactivity. We developed a novel 360° tool, ObReco-2 (Object Recognition version 2), for the assessment of visual memory which simulates a daily situation in a virtual house. More precisely, patients are asked to memorize some objects that need to be moved for a relocation. After this phase, they are asked to recall them after 15 min and later to recognize them in the same environment. Here we present a first study about the usability of ObReco-2, and a second one exploring its clinical efficacy and updated usability data. We focused on Free Recall and Recognition scores, comparing the performances obtained by the participants in the standard and the 360° test. The preliminary results support the use of 360° technology for enhancing the ecological value of standard memory assessment tests.

Systematic review of memory assessment in virtual reality: evaluating convergent and divergent validity with traditional neuropsychological measures

“…Through a thorough examination of the available literature, it emerges that VR tools that have been tested and proven to be reliable on older adults and have provided correlations with established neuropsychological assessments cover a wide array of memory areas such as episodic memory ( Plancher et al, 2010 ; Arvind Pala et al, 2014 ; Kempe et al, 2015 ; Zygouris et al, 2015 ; Sauzéon et al, 2016 ; Ouellet et al, 2018 ; Corriveau Lecavalier et al, 2020 ; Eraslan Boz et al, 2020 ; Limoncu et al, 2021 ; Turner et al, 2021 ; Bruni et al, 2022 ; Pieri et al, 2022 ), verbal memory ( Gottlieb et al, 2022 ), prospective memory ( Lecouvey et al, 2019 ; Hogan et al, 2023 ), and spatial memory ( Cushman et al, 2008 ; Tippett et al, 2009 ; Morganti et al, 2013 ; Lee et al, 2014 ; Serino et al, 2015 ; Mohammadi et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2021 ; Da Costa et al, 2022 ; Rekers and Finke, 2023 ).…”

“…Subsequently, participants are instructed to locate and nominate all ten objects that were previously presented during the encoding phase, amidst a set of 17 additional non-target objects. In an upgraded version ( Bruni et al, 2022 ), participants are exposed to a domestic environment, a living room, from the experimenter’s first-person perspective. They follow the perspective of the 360° video which selectively stops at the 15 designated objects for a duration of 3 s each, while simultaneously affixing a label inscribed with the appellation “Marco” to each item.…”

“…The OBRECO task ( Bruni et al, 2022 ; Pieri et al, 2022 ) correlated with AM and RAVLT, i.e., executive functions and memory measures. The supermarket of Kempe et al (2015) correlated with a verbal complex span; the supermarket of Zygouris et al (2015) with most of the neuropsychological measures; the supermarket of Eraslan Boz et al (2020) negatively correlated with general cognitive status, verbal and visual memory and visuo-spatial construction but positively with executive functions.…”

“…The demographic groups primarily subjected to examination through the utilization of VR tools for the purpose of memory assessment primarily consist of healthy older adults ( Cushman et al, 2008 ; Tippett et al, 2009 ; Plancher et al, 2010 ; Morganti et al, 2013 ; Arvind Pala et al, 2014 ; Lee et al, 2014 ; Kempe et al, 2015 ; Serino et al, 2015 ; Zygouris et al, 2015 ; Sauzéon et al, 2016 ; Mohammadi et al, 2018 ; Lecouvey et al, 2019 ; Corriveau Lecavalier et al, 2020 ; Eraslan Boz et al, 2020 ; Limoncu et al, 2021 ; Zhang et al, 2021 ; Bruni et al, 2022 ; Da Costa et al, 2022 ; Gottlieb et al, 2022 ; Pieri et al, 2022 ; Rekers and Finke, 2023 ), older adults with subjective cognitive decline ( Ouellet et al, 2018 ), individuals diagnosed with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) ( Cushman et al, 2008 ; Tippett et al, 2009 ; Serino et al, 2015 ); MCI-single domain (SD) ( Lee et al, 2014 ; Serino et al, 2015 ; Zygouris et al, 2015 ; Mohammadi et al, 2018 ; Eraslan Boz et al, 2020 ), MCI-multiple domain (MD) ( Zygouris et al, 2015 ; Mohammadi et al, 2018 ), patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) ( Turner et al, 2021 ), and PD-MCI ( Turner et al, 2021 ), cognitively normal individuals with small vessel disease (SVD) ( Limoncu et al, 2021 ), individuals with SVD with cognitive impairment ( Limoncu et al, 2021 ); patients with stroke ( Hogan et al, 2023 ), patients with AD ( Cushman et al, 2008 ; Morganti et al, 2013 ; Lee et al, 2014 ; Serino et al, 2015 ; Sauzéon et al, 2016 ; Mohammadi et al, 2018 ; Lecouvey et al, 2019 ). See Table 3 for descriptions of the samples.…”

“…Among the studies under review, five employed video projectors as the primary tool for conducting virtual reality tasks ( Tippett et al, 2009 ; Plancher et al, 2010 ; Arvind Pala et al, 2014 ; Sauzéon et al, 2016 ; Lecouvey et al, 2019 ). Six studies utilized HMDs as their selected hardware ( Ouellet et al, 2018 ; Corriveau Lecavalier et al, 2020 ; Bruni et al, 2022 ; Da Costa et al, 2022 ; Gottlieb et al, 2022 ; Pieri et al, 2022 ).…”