ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2021
A Cognitive Psychometric Investigation of Word Production and Phonological Error Rates in Logopenic Progressive Aphasia.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- From structure to sequence: A multinomial processing tree model of syntactic encoding.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- The Pattern of Phonological, Semantic, and Circumlocution Naming Errors for Nouns and Verbs in Primary Progressive Aphasia.Aphasiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose This study investigated the relationship between word production rates (WPRs) and phonological error rates (PERs) in generative and responsive tasks in logopenic progressive aphasia (lvPPA). We examined whether a portion of the reduced WPR during generative tasks related directly to phonological impairments affecting PER on all tasks, irrespective of other task differences that contributed to WPR. Method Two cognitive psychometric models were hypothesized and fit to the total number of words produced and the number of phonological errors produced by 22 participants on 10 tasks. Bayesian inference was used to construct posterior distributions of participant ability and task difficulty parameters. Model fit statistics were compared. Association strengths for average generative WPR and average responsive PER were also evaluated with linear least-squares regression. Results Average generative WPR and average responsive PER were significantly associated (
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.