Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32330940›Full record

ArticleBrain : a journal of neurology2020

A unified model of post-stroke language deficits including discourse production and their neural correlates.

Reem S W Alyahya, Ajay D Halai, Paul Conroy, Matthew A Lambon Ralph

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Focal Brain Lesions Causing Acquired Amusia Map to a Common Brain Network.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Reem S W AlyahyaMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Ajay D HalaiMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Paul ConroyDivision of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Matthew A Lambon RalphMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/18Medical Research Council MR/R023883/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical profiles of individuals with post-stroke aphasia demonstrate considerable variation in the presentation of symptoms. Recent aphasiological studies have attempted to account for this individual variability using a multivariate data-driven approach (principal component analysis) on an extensive neuropsychological and aphasiological battery, to identify fundamental domains of post-stroke aphasia. These domains mainly reflect phonology, semantics and fluency; however, these studies did not account for variability in response to different forms of connected speech, i.e. discourse genres. In the current study, we initially examined differences in the quantity, diversity and informativeness between three different discourse genres, including a simple descriptive genre and two naturalistic forms of connected speech (storytelling narrative, and procedural discourse). Subsequently, we provided the first quantitative investigation on the multidimensionality of connected speech production at both behavioural and neural levels. Connected speech samples across descriptive, narrative, and procedural discourse genres were collected from 46 patients with chronic post-stroke aphasia and 20 neurotypical adults. Content analyses conducted on all connected speech samples indicated that performance differed across discourse genres and between groups. Specifically, storytelling narratives provided higher quantities of content words and lexical diversity compared to composite picture description and procedural discourse. The analyses further revealed that, relative to neurotypical adults, patients with aphasia, both fluent and non-fluent, showed reduction in the quantity of verbal production, lexical diversity, and informativeness across all discourses. Given the differences across the discourses, we submitted the connected speech metrics to principal component analysis alongside an extensive neuropsychological/aphasiological battery that assesses a wide range of language and cognitive skills. In contrast to previous research, three unique orthogonal connected speech components were extracted in a unified model, reflecting verbal quantity, verbal quality, and motor speech, alongside four core language and cognitive components: phonological production, semantic processing, phonological recognition, and executive functions. Voxel-wise lesion-symptom mapping using these components provided evidence on the involvement of widespread cortical regions and their white matter connections. Specifically, left frontal regions and their underlying white matter tracts corresponding to the frontal aslant tract and the anterior segment of the arcuate fasciculus were particularly engaged with the quantity and quality of fluent connected speech production while controlling for other co-factors. The neural correlates associated with the other language domains align with existing models on the ventral and dorsal pathways for language processing.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAgedAged, 80 and overAphasiaBrainFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeuroimagingStrokeaphasia dimensionsconnected speech productiondiscourselesion-symptom mappingstroke

Identifiers

PMID32330940
PMCPMC7241958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.