Computerised speech and language therapy can help people with aphasia find words following a stroke.

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Neurologic music therapy for non-fluent aphasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2024
   Pooled it
2. The effect of mobile application-based technology on post-stroke aphasia: a systematic review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024
   Pooled it
3. Right C7 neurotomy at the intervertebral foramen plus intensive speech and language therapy versus intensive speech and language therapy alone for chronic post-stroke aphasia: multicentre, randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025
   Trial

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Self-managed, computerised speech and language therapy for patients with chronic aphasia post-stroke compared with usual care or attention control (Big CACTUS): a multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial.2019

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as