Trial reportClinical rehabilitation2021
Self-managed, computerised word finding therapy as an add-on to usual care for chronic aphasia post-stroke: An economic evaluation.
Trial report in Clinical rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of mobile application-based technology on post-stroke aphasia: a systematic review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Aphasia-specific or generic outcomes? a comparison of two health-related quality of life instruments for economic evaluations of aphasia treatments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- The effect of two speech and language approaches on speech problems in people with Parkinson's disease: the PD COMM RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Value-adaptive clinical trial designs for efficient delivery of publicly funded trials - a discussion of methods, case studies, opportunities and challenges.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of neuropsychological rehabilitation for acquired brain injuries: Update of Stolwyk et al.'s (2019) review.Journal of neuropsychology · 2025Article
- Computer- and Smart-Tablet-Based Self-Administered Treatments in Chronic Post-Stroke Aphasia: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Current Approaches to the Treatment of Post-Stroke Aphasia.Journal of stroke · 2021Review
- Economic Evaluations of Speech and Language Therapy Interventions: A Scoping Review.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the cost-effectiveness of self-managed computerised word finding therapy as an add-on to usual care for people with aphasia post-stroke.
designCost-effectiveness modelling over a life-time period, taking a UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social service perspective.
settingBased on the Big CACTUS randomised controlled trial, conducted in 21 UK NHS speech and language therapy departments.
participantsBig CACTUS included 278 people with long-standing aphasia post-stroke.
interventionsComputerised word finding therapy plus usual care; usual care alone; usual care plus attention control. MAIN MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated, comparing the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained for each intervention. Credible intervals (CrI) for costs and QALYs, and probabilities of cost-effectiveness, were obtained using probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Subgroup and scenario analyses investigated cost-effectiveness in different subsets of the population, and the sensitivity of results to key model inputs.
resultsAdding computerised word finding therapy to usual care had an ICER of £42,686 per QALY gained compared with usual care alone (incremental QALY gain: 0.02 per patient (95% CrI: -0.05 to 0.10); incremental costs: £732.73 per patient (95% CrI: £674.23 to £798.05)). ICERs for subgroups with mild or moderate word finding difficulties were £22,371 and £21,262 per QALY gained respectively.
conclusionComputerised word finding therapy represents a low cost add-on to usual care, but QALY gains and estimates of cost-effectiveness are uncertain. Computerised therapy is more likely to be cost-effective for people with mild or moderate, as opposed to severe, word finding difficulties.
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.