Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33281268›Full record

ArticleAphasiology2020

The influence of prestroke proficiency on poststroke lexical-semantic performance in bilingual aphasia.

Claudia Peñaloza, Katherine Barrett, Swathi Kiran

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aphasiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Aphasia in Multilingual Patients.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claudia PeñalozaAphasia Research Laboratory, Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Katherine BarrettAphasia Research Laboratory, Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Swathi KiranAphasia Research Laboratory, Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Boston University · US

Funding

Predicting rehabilitation outcomes in bilingual aphasia using computational modelingU01DC014922 · NIDCD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI KIRAN, SWATHI, MIIKKULAINEN, RISTO · 2016 to 2020
$3.5M
Computational and Behavioral Evidence for Bilingual Aphasia RehabilitationR21DC009446 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI KIRAN, SWATHI, MIIKKULAINEN, RISTO · 2009 to 2010
$401k
NIDCD NIH HHS R21 DC009446NIDCD NIH HHS U01 DC014922
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBilingual persons with aphasia (BWA) may present different degrees and patterns of impairment in their two languages. Previous research suggests that prestroke proficiency may be amongst the factors determining poststroke language impairment in BWA, however this relationship is not well understood.

aimsThe purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between prestroke proficiency and poststroke lexical-semantic performance in BWA and to identify common patterns of language impairment in this population. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Twenty-seven Spanish-English BWA (14 female, age range = 29-88 years) were administered a language use questionnaire (LUQ) to measure several aspects of their bilingual language history that contribute to their prestroke proficiency in both languages. They also underwent standardized language assessments tapping lexical-semantic performance in each language. A principal component analysis was first conducted on the LUQ metrics to determine the factors that contributed to prestroke proficiency in each language. Next, regression analyses allowed assessing the relationships between prestroke proficiency and poststroke lexical-semantic performance in both languages. Differences in proficiency and language performance across languages were contrasted prior and after stroke to identify profiles of impairment. OUTCOMES AND

resultsPrestroke proficiency in the native language was determined by daily use, educational history, lifetime exposure, and language ability rating. Prestroke proficiency in the second language was determined by age of acquisition, daily use, educational history, lifetime exposure, lifetime confidence, family proficiency, and language ability rating. Prestroke proficiency significantly predicted poststroke lexical-semantic performance in BWA in both languages. Twenty-two participants presented parallel impairment while only three presented differential impairment.

conclusionsOur results confirm that prestroke language proficiency is a key predictor of poststroke language impairment in BWA. These findings have important implications for the assessment and diagnosis of aphasia in bilingual individuals.

Indexed as

bilingual aphasialanguage impairmentlexical-semantic performanceprestroke proficiency

Identifiers

PMID33281268
PMCPMC7716615
OpenAlexW2973183196

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.