Trial reportPloS one2016
Evaluating the Benefits of Aphasia Intervention Delivered in Virtual Reality: Results of a Quasi-Randomised Study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Group rehabilitation for adults with acquired neurological disorders: A systematic review of mono- and interdisciplinary interventions in physical and speech-language therapy.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of virtual reality in post-stroke aphasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021Pooled it
- Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Exploring the Effectiveness of Technology-Based Interventions in Aphasia Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.International journal of language & communication disordersPooled it
- Communication Partner Engagement: A Relevant Factor for Functional Outcomes in Speech-Language Therapy for Aphasic Dementia.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Diagnosing and managing post-stroke aphasia.Expert review of neurotherapeutics · 2021Trial
- A randomised trial of social support group intervention for people with aphasia: A Novel application of virtual reality.PloS one · 2020Trial
- Article
- Multiparty Communication: A New Direction in Characterizing the Impact of Traumatic Brain Injury on Social Communication.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Review
- Computer- and Smart-Tablet-Based Self-Administered Treatments in Chronic Post-Stroke Aphasia: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Current status of Tele-speech language therapy by type and support for patients with post-stroke aphasia: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- Interventions in ambulatory healthcare settings to reduce social isolation among adults aged 18-64: a systematic review.BJGP open · 2024Article
- AI-assisted assessment and treatment of aphasia: a review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Review
- Virtual Reality for the Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Rehabilitation Supported by Immersive Virtual Reality for Adults With Communication Disorders: Semistructured Interviews and Usability Survey Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2023Article
- Therapies and Challenges in the Post-Stroke Aphasia Rehabilitation Arena: Current and Future Prospects.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Reversing the Ruin: Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Restoration After Stroke.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2022Review
- A Mobile-based Virtual Reality Speech Rehabilitation App for Patients With Aphasia After Stroke: Development and Pilot Usability Study.JMIR serious games · 2022Article
- Automatic boost articulation therapy in adults with dysarthria: Acceptability, usability and user interaction.International journal of language & communication disorders · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study evaluated an intervention for people with aphasia delivered in a novel virtual reality platform called EVA Park. EVA Park contains a number of functional and fantastic locations and allows for interactive communication between multiple users. Twenty people with aphasia had 5 weeks' intervention, during which they received daily language stimulation sessions in EVA Park from a support worker. The study employed a quasi randomised design, which compared a group that received immediate intervention with a waitlist control group. Outcome measures explored the effects of intervention on communication and language skills, communicative confidence and feelings of social isolation. Compliance with the intervention was also explored through attrition and usage data.
resultsThere was excellent compliance with the intervention, with no participants lost to follow up and most (18/20) receiving at least 88% of the intended treatment dose. Intervention brought about significant gains on a measure of functional communication. Gains were achieved by both groups of participants, once intervention was received, and were well maintained. Changes on the measures of communicative confidence and feelings of social isolation were not achieved. Results are discussed with reference to previous aphasia therapy findings.
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.