ArticleAphasiology2020
Visuomotor Figure Construction and Visual Figure Delayed Recall and Recognition in Primary Progressive Aphasia.
Article in Aphasiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Atypical clinical variants of Alzheimer's disease: are they really atypical?Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Neural regions underlying object and action naming: Complementary evidence from acute stroke and primary progressive aphasia.Aphasiology · 2022Article
- Clinical and neuroimaging characteristics of primary progressive aphasia.Handbook of clinical neurology · 2022Review
- Verbal Short-Term Memory Disturbance in the Primary Progressive Aphasias: Challenges and Distinctions in a Clinical Setting.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Longitudinal cognitive and functional changes in primary progressive aphasia.Journal of neurology · 2021Article
- Diagnostic Assessment in Primary Progressive Aphasia: An Illustrative Case Example.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2020Article
- Ethical and Practical Challenges of the Communication and Behavioral Manifestations of Primary Progressive Aphasia.Seminars in speech and language · 2020Article
- Classification of primary progressive aphasia: challenges and complexities.F1000Research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) develop visuospatial deficits over time, and those with logopenic variant (lvPPA) are at greatest risk of developing such deficits. However, not all previous studies of visuospatial deficits in PPA have ensured equivalent duration of disease across variants and few have measured deficits longitudinally.
aimsThe aims of our study were to: 1) investigate differences in baseline visuomotor figure construction, visual figure delayed recall, and figure recognition in PPA variants with similar symptom duration at baseline, and 2) explore patterns of decline in these areas. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Ninety-three individuals with PPA [39 lvPPA, 24 nonfluent agrammatic PPA (nfaPPA), and 30 semantic variant PPA (svPPA)] were administered the Benson Complex Figure Copy, Benson Complex Figure Delay (Recall), and Benson Figure Recognition. Thirty individuals completed this testing 3 to 47 months post baseline. OUTCOME &
resultsParticipants with lvPPA and svPPA showed lower mean scores than those with nfaPPA on visual figure delayed recall at baseline, even though there were no differences in estimated time from disease onset or correlation with disease severity as reflected by naming performance,
conclusionsThese findings revealed relatively spared visuospatial memory in nfaPPA, which may aid in the differential diagnosis of PPA and contribute to designing therapy or compensatory strategies.
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.