Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33467602›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2021

Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar Analyses of Cinderella Narratives in a Large Sample of Persons with Aphasia.

Jessica D Richardson, Sarah Grace Dalton, Kathryn J Greenslade, Adam Jacks, Katarina L Haley, Janet Adams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Within- and Cross-Language Generalization in Narrative Production of Bilingual Persons with Aphasia following Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Automated Analysis of Fluency Behaviors in Aphasia.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Assessment of language impairment and function.Handbook of clinical neurology · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Jessica D RichardsonDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA.
Sarah Grace DaltonDepartment of Speech-Pathology and Audiology, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA.
Kathryn J GreensladeDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6269-4624
Adam JacksDepartment of Allied Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6358-2878
Katarina L HaleyDepartment of Allied Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Janet AdamsDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA.

Funding

University of New Mexico (UNM) Center for Brain Recovery and RepairP20GM109089 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI SHUTTLEWORTH, CLAUDE W · 2015 to 2024
$22.7M
RHDBank Database DevelopmentR01DC008524 · NIDCD · CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY · PI BRIAN MACWHINNEY · 2007 to 2026
$7.0M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC008524NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM109089NIH HHS P20GM109089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, a multilevel analytic approach called Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar (MSSG) was presented along with preliminary normative information. MSSG analyses leverage the strong psychometrics and rich procedural knowledge of both main concept analysis and story grammar component coding, complementing it with easy-to-obtain sequencing information for a rich understanding of discourse informativeness and macrostructure. This study is the next critical step for demonstrating the clinical usefulness of MSSG's six variables (main concept composite, sequencing, main concept+sequencing, essential story grammar components, total episodic components, and episodic complexity) for persons with aphasia (PWAs). We present descriptive statistical information for MSSG variables for a large sample of PWAs and compare their performance to a large sample of persons not brain injured (PNBIs). We observed significant differences between PWAs and PNBIs for all MSSG variables. These differences occurred at the omnibus group level and for each aphasia subtype, even for PWAs with very mild impairment that is not detected with standardized aphasia assessment. Differences between PWAs and PNBIs were also practically significant, with medium to large effect sizes observed for nearly all aphasia subtypes and MSSG variables. This work deepens our understanding of discourse informativeness and macrostructure in PWAs and further develops an efficient tool for research and clinical use. Future research should investigate ways to expand MSSG analyses and to improve sensitivity and specificity.

Indexed as

aphasiaAphasiaBankCinderelladiscourseepisodemain concept analysisMSSGnarrativesequencingstory grammar

Identifiers

PMID33467602
PMCPMC7830981

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.