Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28259857›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry2017

Auditory training changes temporal lobe connectivity in 'Wernicke's aphasia': a randomised trial.

Zoe Vj Woodhead, Jennifer Crinion, Sundeep Teki, Will Penny, Cathy J Price, Alexander P Leff

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Rehabilitation interventions for Wernicke's aphasia and related fluent aphasia: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Cholinergic modulation of sensory perception and plasticity.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2023
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zoe Vj WoodheadDepartment of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation, University College London, London, UK.
Jennifer CrinionInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, UK.
Sundeep TekiDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Will PennyWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, London, UK.
Cathy J PriceWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, London, UK.
Alexander P LeffWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, London, UK.
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of Health II-LB-0813-20004Medical Research Council MR/K022563/1Medical Research Council MR/M023672/1Wellcome Trust 205103/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAphasia is one of the most disabling sequelae after stroke, occurring in 25%-40% of stroke survivors. However, there remains a lack of good evidence for the efficacy or mechanisms of speech comprehension rehabilitation. TRIAL

designThis within-subjects trial tested two concurrent interventions in 20 patients with chronic aphasia with speech comprehension impairment following left hemisphere stroke: (1) phonological training using 'Earobics' software and (2) a pharmacological intervention using donepezil, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. Donepezil was tested in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over design using block randomisation with bias minimisation.

methodsThe primary outcome measure was speech comprehension score on the comprehensive aphasia test. Magnetoencephalography (MEG) with an established index of auditory perception, the mismatch negativity response, tested whether the therapies altered effective connectivity at the lower (primary) or higher (secondary) level of the auditory network.

resultsPhonological training improved speech comprehension abilities and was particularly effective for patients with severe deficits. No major adverse effects of donepezil were observed, but it had an unpredicted negative effect on speech comprehension. The MEG analysis demonstrated that phonological training increased synaptic gain in the left superior temporal gyrus (STG). Patients with more severe speech comprehension impairments also showed strengthening of bidirectional connections between the left and right STG.

conclusionsPhonological training resulted in a small but significant improvement in speech comprehension, whereas donepezil had a negative effect. The connectivity results indicated that training reshaped higher order phonological representations in the left STG and (in more severe patients) induced stronger interhemispheric transfer of information between higher levels of auditory cortex.Clinical trial registrationThis trial was registered with EudraCT (2005-004215-30, https://

Indexed as

Aphasia, WernickeAuditory PerceptionCholinesterase InhibitorsComprehensionDonepezilDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansIndansMagnetoencephalographyMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsPiperidinesSpeech PerceptionTemporal LobeCholinesterase InhibitorsDonepezilIndansPiperidinesmagnetoencephalographypharmacological trialphonological trainingspeech comprehensionWernicke’s aphasia

Identifiers

PMID28259857
PMCPMC5659142
OpenAlexW2591767650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.