Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29246487›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychologia2018

Practice effects in healthy older adults: Implications for treatment-induced neuroplasticity in Aphasia.

Jacquie Kurland, Anna Liu, Polly Stokes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

3 authors.

Jacquie KurlandUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Communication Disorders, United States. Electronic address: jkurland@comdis.umass.edu.
Anna LiuUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, United States.
Polly StokesUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Communication Disorders, United States.

Funding

Overcoming Learned Non-Use in Chronic Aphasia: Behavioral, fMRI, and QoL OutcomesR01DC011526 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST · PI KURLAND, JACQUIE · 2012 to 2016
$1.7M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC011526
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In treating aphasic individuals with anomia, practice naming pictures leads to better performance as measured by accuracy and reaction time. The neurocognitive mechanisms supporting such improvements remain elusive, in part due to gaps in understanding the influence of practice on neurotypical older adults. The current study investigated the influence of practice naming one set of low frequency pictures of actions and objects in 18 healthy older adults, ten of whom were tested twice approximately one month apart. Both item and task practice effects were observed in improved accuracy and response latencies naming pictures in the scanner. This same facilitation effect was observed in neuroimaging results. For example, a significant main effect of practice was observed in bilateral precuneus and left inferior parietal lobule, characterized by greater activity for naming practiced vs. unpracticed pictures. This difference was significantly diminished in subsequent runs after exposure to unpracticed pictures. Whole brain analyses across two sessions showed that practice effects were specific to practice, i.e., there were not similar observable changes in contrasts examining actions vs. objects over time. These findings have important implications for understanding treatment-induced neuroplasticity in anomia treatment.

Indexed as

Neuronal PlasticityPractice, PsychologicalAgedAphasiaBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNamesNeural PathwaysPattern Recognition, VisualSpeechStrokefMRINeuroplasticityPicture namingPractice

Identifiers

PMID29246487
PMCPMC5801110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.