ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2020
Using a Discourse Task to Explore Semantic Ability in Persons With Cognitive Impairment.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Naming Ability in the Chronic Phase of Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Article
- Comparing global and local semantic coherence of spontaneous speech in persons with Alzheimer's disease and healthy controls.Applied Corpus Linguistics · 2023Article
- CareD: Caregiver's Experience with Cognitive Decline in Reddit Posts.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics · 2023Article
- Learning implicit sentiments in Alzheimer's disease recognition with contextual attention features.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- An approach for assisting diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease based on natural language processing.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- An Analysis of Right Hemisphere Stroke Discourse in the Modern Cookie Theft Picture.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022Article
- Clinical Guidelines for Eliciting Discourse Using the RHDBank Protocol.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022Article
- Naming as a window to word retrieval changes in healthy and pathological ageing: Methodological considerations.International journal of language & communication disordersReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper uses a discourse task to explore aspects of semantic production in persons with various degree of cognitive impairment and healthy controls. The purpose of the study was to test if an in-depth semantic analysis of a cognitive-linguistic challenging discourse task could differentiate persons with a cognitive decline from those with a stable cognitive impairment. Both quantitative measures of semantic ability, using tests of oral lexical retrieval, and qualitative analysis of a narrative were used to detect semantic difficulties. Besides group comparisons a classification experiment was performed to investigate if the discourse features could be used to improve classification of the participants who had a stable cognitive impairment from those who had cognitively declined. In sum, both types of assessment methods captured difficulties between the groups, but tests of oral lexical retrieval most successfully differentiated between the cognitively stable and the cognitively declined group. Discourse features improved classification accuracy and the best combination of features discriminated between participants with a stable cognitive impairment and those who had cognitively declined with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.93.
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.