Leveraging Virtual Reality (VR) to Enhance Construction Design Management (CDM)

This study presents a systematic and bibliometric review exploring how Virtual Reality (VR) enhances Construction Design Management (CDM) through improved visualization, collaboration, and safety integration. Using the Web of Science Core Collection as the primary database, 59 peer-reviewed publications from 1999 to 2025 were analyzed using VOSviewer for keyword co-occurrence, author and journal co-citation, and document clustering to map the intellectual and thematic structure of VR-CDM research. The analysis reveals that global interest in VR applications within CDM has accelerated significantly since 2017, driven by the industry’s digital transformation under Construction 4.0. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Italy dominate the research landscape, while developing nations, including Malaysia, remain underrepresented. Four dominant research clusters were identified: (1) design visualization and collaborative review, (2) BIM–VR integration, (3) safety management and training, and (4) human–technology interaction. The findings underscore VR’s transformative potential in supporting safe-by-design and prevention-through-design principles by enabling early hazard identification and participatory design reviews. However, adoption remains constrained by high costs, interoperability challenges, a lack of standardization, and limited empirical validation. This review concludes that VR serves as a pivotal enabler for proactive, data-driven, and safety-oriented design management in the Construction 4.0 era. Future research should integrate VR with Artificial Intelligence (AI), Digital Twins, and Extended Reality (XR) to create intelligent safety design ecosystems aligned with evolving regulatory frameworks such as Malaysia’s Occupational Safety and Health (Construction Work) (Design and Management) Regulations 2024.

Virtual Reality; Immersive Technology; Construction

1. Afzal, M., Shafiq, M. T., & Al Jassmi, H. (2021). Improving construction safety with virtual-design construction technologies-a review. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. Sage Open, 9(1), 2158244019829575. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Angra, S., Jangra, S., Gulzar, Y., Sharma, B., Singh, G., & Onn, C. W. (2025). Twenty-two years of advancements in augmented and virtual reality: a bibliometric and systematic review. Frontiers in Computer Science, 7, 1470038. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Balali, V., Noghabaei, M., Heydarian, A., & Han, K. (2018). Improved stakeholder communication and visualizations: Real-time interaction and cost estimation within immersive virtual environments. Construction Research Congress 2018, 522–530. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cao, D., & Shao, S. (2020). Towards Complexity and Dynamics: A Bibliometric‐Qualitative Review of Network Research in Construction. Complexity, 2020(1), 8812466. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(2), 1–40. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Elbir, U. (2025). The role of human resource management in implementing’prevention through design’(PtD) strategies to enhance occupational health and safety in the construction industry: A thematic analysis approach. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 13(3), 1391–1413. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Fakoyede, P. D., Diouf, M. D. B., Aruya, G. A., Fakoya, I. A., Enabulele, E. C., Adeleke, O. B., Daramola, M. S., & Aeyemi, T. O. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Digital Technology in Architectural, Engineering Construction Industries Across Six Continents of the World: A Global Perspective. Path of Science, 10(7), 3013–3022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 257–276). Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Gutierrez-Bucheli, L., Goh, J. T., Rashidi, A., Maxwell, D., Digby, R., Fang, Y., Pook, H., & Arashpour, M. (2025). Adopting immersive technologies in construction training: determining educational decision-making criteria through a Delphi technique. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 14(5), 1434–1458. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Haddaway, N. R., Woodcock, P., Macura, B., & Collins, A. (2015). Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews. Conservation Biology, 29(6), 1596–1605. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hajirasouli, A., Assadimoghadam, A., Bashir, M. A., & Banihashemi, S. (2025). Exploring the Impact of Construction 4.0 on Industrial Relations: A Comprehensive Thematic Synthesis of Workforce Transformation in the Digital Era of Construction. Buildings, 15(9), 1428. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Halder, S. (2025). Technology Trends and Digital Transformation in Construction. In Handbook of Construction Project Management (pp. 789–811). Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Han, R., Gao, Y., & Shao, D. (2016). Research on the application of building information model technology in the design of Urban residential buildings in cold region. International Journal of Smart Home. https://doi.org/10.14257/ijsh.2016.10.5.17 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hare, B., Campbell, J., Skivington, C., & Cameron, I. (2019). Improving designers’ knowledge of hazards. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hussain, A., Che Ibrahim, C. K. I., Belayutham, S., Manu, P., & Cheung, C. (2025). Exploring regulatory capabilities for design for safety in construction: the case of Malaysia. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Karakhan, A. A., & Gambatese, J. A. (2017). Safety innovation and integration in high-performance designs: Benefits, motivations, and obstacles. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 22(4), 04017018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kleinberg, J. (2002). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. Proceedings of the Eighth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 91–101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Korkut, E. H., & Surer, E. (2023). Visualization in virtual reality: a systematic review. Virtual Reality, 27(2), 1447–1480. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kostadimas, D., Kasapakis, V., & Kotis, K. (2025). A systematic review on the combination of VR, IoT and AI technologies, and their integration in applications. Future Internet, 17(4), 163. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Lepola, A., Kärkkäinen, H., Jalo, H., & Torro, O. (2020). Collaborative Virtual Reality as an Adaptable Boundary Object in the Design Phase of Facility Life Cycle. Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Leung, X. Y., Sun, J., & Bai, B. (2017). Bibliometrics of social media research: A co-citation and co-word analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Marzouk, M., Bin Mahmoud, A. A., Al-Gahtani, K. S., & Adel, K. (2025). Automation in Construction (2000–2023): Science Mapping and Visualization of Journal Publications. Buildings, 15(15), 2789. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mastrolembo Ventura, S., Castronovo, F., Nikolić, D., & Ciribini, A. L. C. (2019). A framework of procedural considerations for implementing virtual reality in design review. EC3 Conference 2019, 1, 442–451. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl_1), 5200–5205. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Newman, M. E. J. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(23), 8577–8582. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Nikolić, D., & Whyte, J. (2021). Visualizing a new sustainable world: Toward the next generation of virtual reality in the built environment. Buildings, 11(11), 546. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Oesterreich, T. D., & Teuteberg, F. (2016). Understanding the implications of digitisation and automation in the context of Industry 4.0: A triangulation approach and elements of a research agenda for the construction industry. Computers in Industry, 83, 121–139. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Paes, D., & Irizarry, J. (2018). A usability study of an immersive virtual reality platform for building design review: Considerations on human factors and user interface. Construction Research Congress 2018, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Park, H., Panya, D. S., Goo, H., Kim, T., & Seo, J. (2018). BIM-based virtual reality and human behavior simulation for safety design. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Patel, H., Pettitt, M., & Wilson, J. R. (2012). Factors of collaborative working: A framework for a collaboration model. In Applied Ergonomics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.04.009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Pessin, V. Z., Yamane, L. H., & Siman, R. R. (2022). Smart bibliometrics: an integrated method of science mapping and bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 127(6), 3695–3718. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Petrovich, E. (2021). Science mapping and science maps. Knowledge Organization, 48(7–8), 535–562. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Pham, V. B., Wong, S. P. P., & Abbasnejad, B. (2025). A systematic review of criteria influencing the integration of BIM and Immersive Technology in building projects. Journal of Information Technology in Construction. https://doi.org/10.36680/j.itcon.2025.011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Pishdad-Bozorgi, P., Gao, X., Eastman, C., & Self, A. P. (2018). Planning and developing facility management-enabled building information model (FM-enabled BIM). Automation in Construction, 87(October 2017), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.12.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), 12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Rasheed, K., Saad, S., Ammad, S., & Bashir, M. T. (2024). Industry 4.0 and construction. In AI in Material Science (pp. 65–87). CRC Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Renganathan, B., Shanthi Priya, R., Kumar, G. R., Thiruvengadam, J., & Senthil, R. (2025). Intuitive and Experiential Approaches to Enhance Conceptual Design in Architecture Using Building Information Modeling and Virtual Reality. Infrastructures, 10(6), 127. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Robertson De Ferrari, N. (2023). VR and co-design: Examining virtual reality as a collaborative tool for the early stages of the design process. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Rojas-Sánchez, M. A., Palos-Sánchez, P. R., & Folgado-Fernández, J. A. (2023). Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis on virtual reality and education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 155–192. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Rubio-Tamayo, J. L., Gertrudix Barrio, M., & García García, F. (2017). Immersive environments and virtual reality: Systematic review and advances in communication, interaction and simulation. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 1(4), 21. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Selvaprasanth, P., Karthigaipriya, T., John, J., & Student, P. G. (2021). Adoption of Virtual Reality in Construction Projects. 23. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Shaheen, N., Shaheen, A., Ramadan, A., Hefnawy, M. T., Ramadan, A., Ibrahim, I. A., Hassanein, M. E., Ashour, M. E., & Flouty, O. (2023). Appraising systematic reviews: a comprehensive guide to ensuring validity and reliability. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 8, 1268045. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: a best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 747–770. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Swallow, M., & Zulu, S. (2024). Enhancing collaboration and engagement using virtual reality within site safety planning. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Management, Procurement and Law, 40, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Tariq, M. A., Farooq, U., Aamir, E., & Shafaqat, R. (2019). Exploring adoption of integrated building information modelling and virtual reality. 2019 International Conference on Electrical, Communication, and Computer Engineering (ICECCE), 1–6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Truong, P., Hölttä-Otto, K., Becerril, P., Turtiainen, R., & Siltanen, S. (2021). Multi-user virtual reality for remote collaboration in construction projects: A case study with high-rise elevator machine room planning. Electronics (Switzerland), 10(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10222806 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Turner, C. J., Hutabarat, W., Oyekan, J., & Tiwari, A. (2016). Discrete event simulation and virtual reality use in industry: new opportunities and future trends. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 46(6), 882–894. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. van Eck, N. J. (2011). Methodological advances in bibliometric mapping of science (Issue EPS-2011-247-LIS). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing bibliometric networks. In Measuring scholarly impact (pp. 285–320). Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Vercelli, G., Iacono, S., Martini, L., Zardetto, M., & Zolezzi, D. (2024). From Risk to Readiness: VR-Based Safety Training for Industrial Hazards. ArXiv:2412.13725. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.13725. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Wen, Q.-J., Ren, Z.-J., Lu, H., & Wu, J.-F. (2021). The progress and trend of BIM research: A bibliometrics-based visualization analysis. Automation in Construction, 124, 103558. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Yan, L., & Zhiping, W. (2023). Mapping the literature on academic publishing: A bibliometric analysis on WOS. Sage Open, 13(1), 21582440231158560. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Yusoff, N. N. S. M., Mohd, N. I., & Ariffin, H. L. T. (2025). Review on cdm implementation in the malaysian construction industry. International Journal of Professional Business Review: Int. J. Prof. Bus. Rev., 10(1), 1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Zhou, W., Whyte, J., & Sacks, R. (2012). Construction safety and digital design: A review. Automation in Construction, 22, 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2011.07.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• What the Desert Fathers Teach Data Scientists: Ancient Ascetic Principles for Ethical Machine-Learning Practice
• Comparative Analysis of Some Machine Learning Algorithms for the Classification of Ransomware
• Comparative Performance Analysis of Some Priority Queue Variants in Dijkstra’s Algorithm
• Transfer Learning in Detecting E-Assessment Malpractice from a Proctored Video Recordings.
• Dual-Modal Detection of Parkinson’s Disease: A Clinical Framework and Deep Learning Approach Using NeuroParkNet