ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2020
How the speed of word finding depends on ventral tract integrity in primary progressive aphasia.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scalp acupuncture coupled with speech-language therapy modulates the ventral-dorsal structural brain network in patients with post-stroke anomia: a randomized clinical and DTI neuroimaging trial.Chinese medicine · 2026Article
- Functional anatomy and topographical organization of the frontotemporal arcuate fasciculus.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Wernicke's functional neuroanatomy model of language turns 150: what became of its psychological reflex arcs?Brain structure & function · 2024Review
- Dissociating the functional roles of arcuate fasciculus subtracts in speech production.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- White matter correlates of sensorimotor synchronization in persistent developmental stuttering.Journal of 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a clinical neurodegenerative syndrome with word finding problems as a core clinical symptom. Many aspects of word finding have been clarified in psycholinguistics using picture naming and a picture-word interference (PWI) paradigm, which emulates naming under contextual noise. However, little is known about how word finding depends on white-matter tract integrity, in particular, the atrophy of tracts located ventrally to the Sylvian fissure. To elucidate this question, we examined word finding in individuals with PPA and healthy controls employing PWI, tractography, and computer simulations using the WEAVER++ model of word finding. Twenty-three individuals with PPA and twenty healthy controls named pictures in two noise conditions. Mixed-effects modelling was performed on naming accuracy and reaction time (RT) and fixel-based tractography analyses were conducted to assess the relation between ventral white-matter integrity and naming performance. Naming RTs were longer for individuals with PPA compared to controls and, critically, individuals with PPA showed a larger noise effect compared to controls. Moreover, this difference in noise effect was differentially related to tract integrity. Whereas the noise effect did not depend much on tract integrity in controls, a lower tract integrity was related to a smaller noise effect in individuals with PPA. Computer simulations supported an explanation of this paradoxical finding in terms of reduced propagation of noise when tract integrity is low. By using multimodal analyses, our study indicates the significance of the ventral pathway for naming and the importance of RT measurement in the clinical assessment of PPA.
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.