SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005
Interventions for apraxia of speech following stroke.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for motor apraxia following stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008Pooled it
- The role of the speech language pathologist in acute stroke.Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology · 2008Review
- Evidence-based speech, language and hearing therapy and the Cochrane Library's systematic reviews.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApraxia of speech is a communication disorder that can affect stroke patients. Several different intervention strategies are undertaken by speech and language therapists working with this patient group.
objectivesTo assess whether therapeutic interventions improve functional speech in stroke patients with apraxia of speech and which individual therapeutic interventions are effective. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (searched May 2004). In addition, we searched the following databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2003); MEDLINE (1966 to April 2004); EMBASE (1980 to April 2004); CINAHL (1982 to April 2004); PsycINFO (1974 to April 2004); the National Research Register (searched April 2004); and Current Controlled Trials Register (searched May 2004). We reviewed reference lists of relevant articles and contacted authors and researchers in an effort to identify published and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought to include randomised controlled trials of non-drug interventions for adults with apraxia of speech following a stroke where the primary outcome was functional speech at six months follow up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One author searched the titles, abstracts and keywords. Two authors examined the abstracts that might meet the inclusion criteria. Four authors were available to assess trial quality and to extract data from eligible studies. MAIN
resultsNo trials were identified. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is no evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions for apraxia of speech. There is a need for high quality randomised trials to be undertaken in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.