ReviewJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2019
Neurocognitive Recovery of Sentence Processing in Aphasia.
Review in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01927302 (The Center for the Neurobiology of Language Recovery), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
The Center for the Neurobiology of Language Recovery (CNLR)
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterizing Verb Argument Structure in Aphasia Using Dependency Parsers.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Charting the Course of Aphasia Recovery: Factors, Trajectories, and Outcomes.Annual review of linguistics · 2025Article
- Treatment-induced neural reorganization in aphasia is language-domain specific: Evidence from a large-scale fMRI study.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2023Article
- Research trends of the neuroimaging in aphasia: A bibliometric analysis and visualization analysis from 2004 to 2021.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Review
- Plasticity of sentence processing networks: evidence from a patient with agrammatic variant of primary progressive aphasia (PPA).Neurocase · 2021Article
- Introduction to the 2018 Research Symposium Forum.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose Reorganization of language networks in aphasia takes advantage of the facts that (a) the brain is an organ of plasticity, with neuronal changes occurring throughout the life span, including following brain damage; (b) plasticity is highly experience dependent; and (c) as with any learning system, language reorganization involves a synergistic interplay between organism-intrinsic (i.e., cognitive and brain) and organism-extrinsic (i.e., environmental) variables. A major goal for clinical treatment of aphasia is to be able to prescribe treatment and predict its outcome based on the neurocognitive deficit profiles of individual patients. This review article summarizes the results of research examining the neurocognitive effects of psycholinguistically based treatment (i.e., Treatment of Underlying Forms; Thompson & Shapiro, 2005) for sentence processing impairments in individuals with chronic agrammatic aphasia resulting from stroke and primary progressive aphasia and addresses both behavioral and brain variables related to successful treatment outcomes. The influences of lesion volume and location, perfusion (blood flow), and resting-state neural activity on language recovery are also discussed as related to recovery of agrammatism and other language impairments. Based on these and other data, principles for promoting neuroplasticity of language networks are presented. Conclusions Sentence processing treatment results in improved comprehension and production of complex syntactic structures in chronic agrammatism and generalization to less complex, linguistically related structures in chronic agrammatism. Patients also show treatment-induced shifts toward normal-like online sentence processing routines (based on eye movement data) and changes in neural recruitment patterns (based on functional neuroimaging), with posttreatment activation of regions overlapping with those within sentence processing and dorsal attention networks engaged by neurotypical adults performing the same task. These findings provide compelling evidence that treatment focused on principles of neuroplasticity promotes neurocognitive recovery in chronic agrammatic aphasia. Presentation Videohttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.10257587.
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.