Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27649984›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2016

[Aphasia: evidence-based therapy approaches].

R Darkow, A Flöel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. BMJ open · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R DarkowKlinik für Neurologie, Arbeitsgruppe Kognitive Neurologie, NeuroCure Research Cluster (NCRC), Center for Stroke Research Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
A FlöelKlinik für Neurologie, Arbeitsgruppe Kognitive Neurologie, NeuroCure Research Cluster (NCRC), Center for Stroke Research Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland. agnes.floeel@charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Speech and language therapy is essential in the rehabilitation of aphasic disorders following a stroke. Due to the predicted increase of aphasia and limited resources within the healthcare system, the development of efficient and sustainable treatment methods is of exceptional importance. The effectiveness of both traditional and innovative approaches needs to be evaluated against the standards of evidence-based medicine. Class I evidence has been established for high-intensity speech and language therapy in subacute and chronic stages of aphasia. Innovative training-based approaches have so far only been evaluated in small studies but promising results have been shown for computer-based naming, video-based exercises for verbalization of complex contents and approaches modeled according to "forced-use" principles with standardized contents. Adjuvant training therapies are being developed to increase and prolong the impact of training alone, most notably non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological modulation. Transcranial direct current stimulation has been shown to effectively enhance training in several small randomized controlled trials but several questions still remain to be answered, including the location of electrode placement as well as the length and intensity of stimulation. Mixed evidence has been collected for the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy on speech learning and further randomized controlled trials are also needed to allow more firmly based recommendations.

Indexed as

AphasiaEvidence-Based MedicineHumansLanguage TherapyOutcome Assessment, Health CareSpeech TherapyTherapy, Computer-AssistedTranscranial Direct Current StimulationTreatment OutcomePharmacotherapyRehabilitationSpeech/language therapyStrokeTranscranial direct current stimulation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.