Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31869850›Full record

ArticleSeminars in speech and language2020

Efficacy of Group Conversation Intervention in Individuals with Severe Profiles of Aphasia.

Elizabeth Hoover, Alexandra McFee, Gayle DeDe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Seminars in speech and language, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Elizabeth HooverDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Alexandra McFeeDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Gayle DeDeDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Funding

A comparison of the effects of dosage and group dynamics on discourse outcomes in aphasiaR21DC015859 · NIDCD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI HOOVER, ELIZABETH L · 2017 to 2019
$499k
NIDCD NIH HHS R21 DC015859
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An estimated 390,000 to 520,000 individuals with severe aphasia (IWSA) currently live in the United States. IWSA experience profound social isolation, which is associated with a wide range of negative health outcomes, including mortality. Treatments for severe aphasia frequently focus on compensatory communication approaches or a discrete communication act rather than on participation-based treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine whether IWSA demonstrated improved performance on standardized language measures, patient-reported outcome measures, and connected speech samples as a result of client-centered conversation group treatment. Results of assessments conducted at pretreatment, posttreatment, and maintenance intervals were variable across participants. All participants demonstrated improvement in at least one of the outcome measures considered. Importantly, none of these measures fully captured how IWSA were able to convey their thoughts in supported conversation. The results lend support for the use of conversation treatment for, and for further study in, this subpopulation of individuals with aphasia.

Indexed as

CommunicationPsychotherapy, GroupAdolescentAphasiaHumansMaleSeverity of Illness IndexTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31869850
PMCPMC7931457

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.