Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29912350›Full record

Trial reportBrain : a journal of neurology2018

Randomized trial of iReadMore word reading training and brain stimulation in central alexia.

Zoe V J Woodhead, Sheila J Kerry, Oscar M Aguilar, Yean-Hoon Ong, John S Hogan, Katerina Pappa, Alex P Leff, Jennifer T Crinion

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

NCT02062619 nacompletednot on this map

Brain Mechanisms Underlying Reading Improvement in Central Alexia

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2014 to 2016Enrolled23ConditionsStroke, Brain Injuries, AphasiaArmsComputer-based behavioural word reading therapy, Real tDCS, Sham tDCS
NCT04849091 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Investigating the Clinical Effectiveness of iReadMore; a Digital Therapy for People With Alexia (Acquired Dyslexia)

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2021 to 2024Enrolled100ConditionsStroke, Brain Injuries, Aphasia, AlexiaArmsiReadMore
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Assessment of language impairment and function.Handbook of clinical neurology · 2022
    Review
  9. Treatment of post-stroke aphasia: A narrative review for stroke neurologists.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2021
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Is Aphasia Treatment Beneficial for the Elderly? A Review of Recent Evidence.Current physical medicine and rehabilitation reports · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. A Review of Biological Interventions in Chronic Aphasia.Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology · 2020
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. How Does iReadMore Therapy Change the Reading Network of Patients with Central Alexia?The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2019
    Article
  18. Aphasia Recovery: When, How and Who to Treat?Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2018
    Review
  19. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Zoe V J WoodheadDepartment of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neurology, University College London, UK.
Sheila J KerryInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
Oscar M AguilarDepartment of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neurology, University College London, UK.
Yean-Hoon OngWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, UK.
John S HoganExperimental Psychology, University College London, UK.
Katerina PappaInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
Alex P LeffDepartment of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neurology, University College London, UK.
Jennifer T CrinionInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
University College London · GBWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K022563/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 106161/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Central alexia is an acquired reading disorder co-occurring with a generalized language deficit (aphasia). We tested the impact of a novel training app, 'iReadMore', and anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the left inferior frontal gyrus, on word reading ability in central alexia. The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02062619). Twenty-one chronic stroke patients with central alexia participated. A baseline-controlled, repeated-measures, crossover design was used. Participants completed two 4-week blocks of iReadMore training, one with anodal stimulation and one with sham stimulation (order counterbalanced between participants). Each block comprised 34 h of iReadMore training and 11 stimulation sessions. Outcome measures were assessed before, between and after the two blocks. The primary outcome measures were reading ability for trained and untrained words. Secondary outcome measures included semantic word matching, sentence reading, text reading and a self-report measure. iReadMore training resulted in an 8.7% improvement in reading accuracy for trained words (95% confidence interval 6.0 to 11.4; Cohen's d = 1.38) but did not generalize to untrained words. Reaction times also improved. Reading accuracy gains were still significant (but reduced) 3 months after training cessation. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (compared to sham), delivered concurrently with iReadMore, resulted in a 2.6% (95% confidence interval -0.1 to 5.3; d = 0.41) facilitation for reading accuracy, both for trained and untrained words. iReadMore also improved performance on the semantic word-matching test. There was a non-significant trend towards improved self-reported reading ability. However, no significant changes were seen at the sentence or text reading level. In summary, iReadMore training in post-stroke central alexia improved reading ability for trained words, with good maintenance of the therapy effect. Anodal stimulation resulted in a small facilitation (d = 0.41) of learning and also generalized to untrained items.10.1093/brain/awy138_video1awy138media15796149281001.

Indexed as

ReadingAdultAgedAphasiaBrainDyslexiaDyslexia, AcquiredFemaleHumansLanguageMaleMiddle AgedPrefrontal CortexSemanticsStrokeTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID29912350
PMCPMC6118228
OpenAlexW2810060884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.