Computerized Virtual Reality in Elderly

Global cognition was measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), a modified version of a neuropsychological battery in the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), which maximum score was 30 including orientation, memory, concentration, language, and praxis (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975; Morris et al., 1989).

Global cognition was measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), a modified version of a neuropsychological battery in the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), which maximum score was 30 including orientation, memory, concentration, language, and praxis (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975; Morris et al., 1989).

Global cognition was measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), a modified version of a neuropsychological battery in the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), which maximum score was 30 including orientation, memory, concentration, language, and praxis (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975; Morris et al., 1989).

Global cognition was measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), a modified version of a neuropsychological battery in the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), which maximum score was 30 including orientation, memory, concentration, language, and praxis (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975; Morris et al., 1989).

Global cognition was measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), a modified version of a neuropsychological battery in the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), which maximum score was 30 including orientation, memory, concentration, language, and praxis (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975; Morris et al., 1989).

Memory was measured by the Word List test, contained three types as following (Morris et al., 1989; Welsh et al., 1994): 1) Immediately recall; 2) Delayed recall; 3) Recognition.

Memory was measured by the Word List test, contained three types as following (Morris et al., 1989; Welsh et al., 1994): 1) Immediately recall; 2) Delayed recall; 3) Recognition.

Memory was measured by the Word List test, contained three types as following (Morris et al., 1989; Welsh et al., 1994): 1) Immediately recall; 2) Delayed recall; 3) Recognition.

Memory was measured by the Word List test, contained three types as following (Morris et al., 1989; Welsh et al., 1994): 1) Immediately recall; 2) Delayed recall; 3) Recognition.

Memory was measured by the Word List test, contained three types as following (Morris et al., 1989; Welsh et al., 1994): 1) Immediately recall; 2) Delayed recall; 3) Recognition.

Attention was measured by the Digit Span (DS) subtest from the Taiwan version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Ⅲ (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2002), which contained two components: DS forward and DS backward.

Attention was measured by the Digit Span (DS) subtest from the Taiwan version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Ⅲ (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2002), which contained two components: DS forward and DS backward.

Attention was measured by the Digit Span (DS) subtest from the Taiwan version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Ⅲ (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2002), which contained two components: DS forward and DS backward.

Attention was measured by the Digit Span (DS) subtest from the Taiwan version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Ⅲ (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2002), which contained two components: DS forward and DS backward.

Attention was measured by the Digit Span (DS) subtest from the Taiwan version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Ⅲ (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2002), which contained two components: DS forward and DS backward.

Visual/spatial function was measured by the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). Participants were asked to draw a clock face, place all the numbers on it, and set the time to 11 past 10 (Powlishta et al., 2002; Shulman, Shedletsky, & Silver, 1986).

Visual/spatial function was measured by the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). Participants were asked to draw a clock face, place all the numbers on it, and set the time to 11 past 10 (Powlishta et al., 2002; Shulman, Shedletsky, & Silver, 1986).

Visual/spatial function was measured by the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). Participants were asked to draw a clock face, place all the numbers on it, and set the time to 11 past 10 (Powlishta et al., 2002; Shulman, Shedletsky, & Silver, 1986).

Visual/spatial function was measured by the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). Participants were asked to draw a clock face, place all the numbers on it, and set the time to 11 past 10 (Powlishta et al., 2002; Shulman, Shedletsky, & Silver, 1986).

Visual/spatial function was measured by the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). Participants were asked to draw a clock face, place all the numbers on it, and set the time to 11 past 10 (Powlishta et al., 2002; Shulman, Shedletsky, & Silver, 1986).

Executive function was measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT)(Golden et al., 2002). It consisted of three subtasks: word reading (RED, GREEN, and BLUE), color naming (XXXX's colored in red, green, or blue ink), and incongruent color-word naming (the words RED, GREEN, and BLUE printed in not matching red, green, or blue ink).

Executive function was measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT)(Golden et al., 2002). It consisted of three subtasks: word reading (RED, GREEN, and BLUE), color naming (XXXX's colored in red, green, or blue ink), and incongruent color-word naming (the words RED, GREEN, and BLUE printed in not matching red, green, or blue ink).

Executive function was measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT)(Golden et al., 2002). It consisted of three subtasks: word reading (RED, GREEN, and BLUE), color naming (XXXX's colored in red, green, or blue ink), and incongruent color-word naming (the words RED, GREEN, and BLUE printed in not matching red, green, or blue ink).

Executive function was measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT)(Golden et al., 2002). It consisted of three subtasks: word reading (RED, GREEN, and BLUE), color naming (XXXX's colored in red, green, or blue ink), and incongruent color-word naming (the words RED, GREEN, and BLUE printed in not matching red, green, or blue ink).

Executive function was measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT)(Golden et al., 2002). It consisted of three subtasks: word reading (RED, GREEN, and BLUE), color naming (XXXX's colored in red, green, or blue ink), and incongruent color-word naming (the words RED, GREEN, and BLUE printed in not matching red, green, or blue ink).

Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) were evaluated with eight abilities, including shopping, transportation, meal preparation, ordinary housework, doing laundry, medications, phone use, and managing finances. Individual items are summed to produce a scale that ranges from 0 to 8 (Lawton, & Brody; 1969; Pashmdarfard & Azad, 2020).

IADL was evaluated with eight abilities including shopping, transportation, meal preparation, ordinary housework, doing laundry, medications, phone use, and managing finances. Individual items are summed to produce a scale that ranges from 0 to 8 (Lawton, & Brody; 1969; Pashmdarfard & Azad, 2020).

IADL was evaluated with eight abilities including shopping, transportation, meal preparation, ordinary housework, doing laundry, medications, phone use, and managing finances. Individual items are summed to produce a scale that ranges from 0 to 8 (Lawton, & Brody; 1969; Pashmdarfard & Azad, 2020).

IADL was evaluated with eight abilities including shopping, transportation, meal preparation, ordinary housework, doing laundry, medications, phone use, and managing finances. Individual items are summed to produce a scale that ranges from 0 to 8 (Lawton, & Brody; 1969; Pashmdarfard & Azad, 2020).

IADL was evaluated with eight abilities including shopping, transportation, meal preparation, ordinary housework, doing laundry, medications, phone use, and managing finances. Individual items are summed to produce a scale that ranges from 0 to 8 (Lawton, & Brody; 1969; Pashmdarfard & Azad, 2020).

A series of functional test include chair stand test, 8-ft up and go test, chair sit and reach test, 6-min walk test, and unipedal stance test was developed by Rikli & Jones.

It has good reliability and validity and test-retest reliability is above 0.9 (Rikli & Jones, 2001).

A series of functional test include chair stand test, 8-ft up and go test, chair sit and reach test, 6-min walk test, and unipedal stance test was developed by Rikli & Jones.

It has good reliability and validity and test-retest reliability is above 0.9 (Rikli & Jones, 2001).

A series of functional test include chair stand test, 8-ft up and go test, chair sit and reach test, 6-min walk test, and unipedal stance test was developed by Rikli & Jones.

It has good reliability and validity and test-retest reliability is above 0.9 (Rikli & Jones, 2001).

A series of functional test include chair stand test, 8-ft up and go test, chair sit and reach test, 6-min walk test, and unipedal stance test was developed by Rikli & Jones.

It has good reliability and validity and test-retest reliability is above 0.9 (Rikli & Jones, 2001).

A series of functional test include chair stand test, 8-ft up and go test, chair sit and reach test, 6-min walk test, and unipedal stance test was developed by Rikli & Jones.

It has good reliability and validity and test-retest reliability is above 0.9 (Rikli & Jones, 2001).

Unipedal stance test was used to examine the static balance on the preferred leg. Participants performed three trials with the eyes open during the test (Goldberg, Casby, & Wasielewski, 2011) .

Unipedal stance test was used to examine the static balance on the preferred leg. Participants performed three trials with the eyes open during the test (Goldberg, Casby, & Wasielewski, 2011) .

Unipedal stance test was used to examine the static balance on the preferred leg. Participants performed three trials with the eyes open during the test (Goldberg, Casby, & Wasielewski, 2011) .

Unipedal stance test was used to examine the static balance on the preferred leg. Participants performed three trials with the eyes open during the test (Goldberg, Casby, & Wasielewski, 2011) .

Unipedal stance test was used to examine the static balance on the preferred leg. Participants performed three trials with the eyes open during the test (Goldberg, Casby, & Wasielewski, 2011) .

Global Well-Being Scale (GWBS): It is a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to measures individuals' perception of well-being. The score of GWBS ranged from 0 to 10 (Hawk et al., 2010).

Analog Scale (VAS) with a ten-centimeter horizontal line (Hawk et al., 2010).

Global Well-Being Scale (GWBS): It is a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to measures individuals' perception of well-being. The score of GWBS ranged from 0 to 10 (Hawk et al., 2010).

Analog Scale (VAS) with a ten-centimeter horizontal line (Hawk et al., 2010).

Global Well-Being Scale (GWBS): It is a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to measures individuals' perception of well-being. The score of GWBS ranged from 0 to 10 (Hawk et al., 2010).

Analog Scale (VAS) with a ten-centimeter horizontal line (Hawk et al., 2010).

Global Well-Being Scale (GWBS): It is a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to measures individuals' perception of well-being. The score of GWBS ranged from 0 to 10 (Hawk et al., 2010).

Analog Scale (VAS) with a ten-centimeter horizontal line (Hawk et al., 2010).

Global Well-Being Scale (GWBS): It is a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to measures individuals' perception of well-being. The score of GWBS ranged from 0 to 10 (Hawk et al., 2010).

Analog Scale (VAS) with a ten-centimeter horizontal line (Hawk et al., 2010).

This scale was developed by Chang and Su (2011) in order to know the interpersonal relationship for middle-aged and older Adults.

It's composed of 22 questions related to the interpersonal relationship: close interaction, approach to others, and friendship support (Chang & Su, 2011).

This scale was developed by Chang and Su (2011) in order to know the interpersonal relationship for middle-aged and older Adults.

It's composed of 22 questions related to the interpersonal relationship: close interaction, approach to others, and friendship support (Chang & Su, 2011).

This scale was developed by Chang and Su (2011) in order to know the interpersonal relationship for middle-aged and older Adults.

It's composed of 22 questions related to the interpersonal relationship: close interaction, approach to others, and friendship support (Chang & Su, 2011).

This scale was developed by Chang and Su (2011) in order to know the interpersonal relationship for middle-aged and older Adults.

It's composed of 22 questions related to the interpersonal relationship: close interaction, approach to others, and friendship support (Chang & Su, 2011).

This scale was developed by Chang and Su (2011) in order to know the interpersonal relationship for middle-aged and older Adults.

It's composed of 22 questions related to the interpersonal relationship: close interaction, approach to others, and friendship support (Chang & Su, 2011).

Chinese version of the GDS-S consisted 15 items with yes/no questions and higher scores indicate a more severe level of depression (Lu, Liu, & Yu, 1998; Pfeiffer, 1975).

Chinese version of the GDS-S consisted 15 items with yes/no questions and higher scores indicate a more severe level of depression (Lu, Liu, & Yu, 1998; Pfeiffer, 1975).

Chinese version of the GDS-S consisted 15 items with yes/no questions and higher scores indicate a more severe level of depression (Lu, Liu, & Yu, 1998; Pfeiffer, 1975).

Chinese version of the GDS-S consisted 15 items with yes/no questions and higher scores indicate a more severe level of depression (Lu, Liu, & Yu, 1998; Pfeiffer, 1975).

Chinese version of the GDS-S consisted 15 items with yes/no questions and higher scores indicate a more severe level of depression (Lu, Liu, & Yu, 1998; Pfeiffer, 1975).

EQ-5D-3L Taiwanese version questionnaire was selected to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) which was recommended in older adults and people with mild dementia (Aguirre, Kang, Hoare, Edwards, & Orrell, 2016; León-Salas et al., 2015). According to the self-report index scores, it can be converted to a single summary utility score by using the time trade-off (TTO) technique. The range of this EQ-5D-3L utility score (EQ5D-Utility) was -0.67 to 1.00 by using the Taiwanese value set (Lee et al., 2013), as the score closer to 1 indicated the better health, a negative score indicated worse than dead, and a 0.5 score could be acceptable.

EQ-5D-3L Taiwanese version questionnaire was selected to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) which was recommended in older adults and people with mild dementia (Aguirre, Kang, Hoare, Edwards, & Orrell, 2016; León-Salas et al., 2015). According to the self-report index scores, it can be converted to a single summary utility score by using the time trade-off (TTO) technique. The range of this EQ-5D-3L utility score (EQ5D-Utility) was -0.67 to 1.00 by using the Taiwanese value set (Lee et al., 2013), as the score closer to 1 indicated the better health, a negative score indicated worse than dead, and a 0.5 score could be acceptable.

EQ-5D-3L Taiwanese version questionnaire was selected to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) which was recommended in older adults and people with mild dementia (Aguirre, Kang, Hoare, Edwards, & Orrell, 2016; León-Salas et al., 2015). According to the self-report index scores, it can be converted to a single summary utility score by using the time trade-off (TTO) technique. The range of this EQ-5D-3L utility score (EQ5D-Utility) was -0.67 to 1.00 by using the Taiwanese value set (Lee et al., 2013), as the score closer to 1 indicated the better health, a negative score indicated worse than dead, and a 0.5 score could be acceptable.

EQ-5D-3L Taiwanese version questionnaire was selected to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) which was recommended in older adults and people with mild dementia (Aguirre, Kang, Hoare, Edwards, & Orrell, 2016; León-Salas et al., 2015). According to the self-report index scores, it can be converted to a single summary utility score by using the time trade-off (TTO) technique. The range of this EQ-5D-3L utility score (EQ5D-Utility) was -0.67 to 1.00 by using the Taiwanese value set (Lee et al., 2013), as the score closer to 1 indicated the better health, a negative score indicated worse than dead, and a 0.5 score could be acceptable.

EQ-5D-3L Taiwanese version questionnaire was selected to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) which was recommended in older adults and people with mild dementia (Aguirre, Kang, Hoare, Edwards, & Orrell, 2016; León-Salas et al., 2015). According to the self-report index scores, it can be converted to a single summary utility score by using the time trade-off (TTO) technique. The range of this EQ-5D-3L utility score (EQ5D-Utility) was -0.67 to 1.00 by using the Taiwanese value set (Lee et al., 2013), as the score closer to 1 indicated the better health, a negative score indicated worse than dead, and a 0.5 score could be acceptable.

A 20-cm visual analogue scale in which respondents are asked to rate their current health status ranging from 0 (Worst imaginable health state) to 100 (Chang et al., 2007; EuroQol Research Foundation, 2018).

A 20-cm visual analogue scale in which respondents are asked to rate their current health status ranging from 0 (Worst imaginable health state) to 100 (Chang et al., 2007; EuroQol Research Foundation, 2018).

A 20-cm visual analogue scale in which respondents are asked to rate their current health status ranging from 0 (Worst imaginable health state) to 100 (Chang et al., 2007; EuroQol Research Foundation, 2018).

A 20-cm visual analogue scale in which respondents are asked to rate their current health status ranging from 0 (Worst imaginable health state) to 100 (Chang et al., 2007; EuroQol Research Foundation, 2018).

A 20-cm visual analogue scale in which respondents are asked to rate their current health status ranging from 0 (Worst imaginable health state) to 100 (Chang et al., 2007; EuroQol Research Foundation, 2018).