ArticleAphasiology2020
To Lump or to Split? Possible Subtypes of Apraxia of Speech.
Article in Aphasiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- A molecular pathology, neurobiology, biochemical, genetic and neuroimaging study of progressive apraxia of speech.Nature communications · 2021Trial
- Diagnosing Apraxia of Speech in Children and Adults When There Is No Gold Standard: A Scoping Review About the Diagnostic Process.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2026Article
- Phonemic simplification in apraxia of speech and aphasia with phonemic paraphasia.Clinical linguistics & phonetics · 2026Article
- Mapping of critical prosodic and phonetic networks in post-stroke apraxia of speech.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Speech sequencing in the human precentral gyrus.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Acoustic Measures of Word-Level Prosody in Childhood Apraxia of Speech: An Initial Validation Study.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Article
- Longitudinal characterization of patients with progressive apraxia of speech without clearly predominant phonetic or prosodic speech features.Brain and language · 2023Article
- Rate Modulation Abilities in Acquired Motor Speech Disorders.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- Three-Dimensional Speech Profiles in Stroke Aphasia and Apraxia of Speech.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2023Article
- An Update on Apraxia of Speech.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2023Review
- Beyond Broca: neural architecture and evolution of a dual motor speech coordination system.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Acoustic Analysis and Neuroimaging Correlates of Diadochokinetic Rates in Mild-Moderate Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech.Brain and language · 2023Article
- Acoustic and Kinematic Assessment of Motor Speech Impairment in Patients With Suspected Four-Repeat Tauopathies.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Article
- Assessing Change in Communication Limitations in Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia: A 1-Year Follow-Up Study.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2021Article
- Apraxia of speech and the study of speech production impairments: Can we avoid further confusion? Reply to Romani (2021).Cognitive neuropsychologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe speculation that apraxia of speech (AOS) is not a unitary diagnosis, but consists of different subtypes instead, has been around for decades. However, attempts to empirically substantiate such a notion remain few and far between.
aimsThe primary objective of this article is to consider the different bases for identifying subtypes of AOS, review existing evidence regarding subtypes under each classification basis, and provide discussion and implications for future research. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: AOS subtypes have been proposed on the basis of clinical symptomatology, theoretical constructs, and an analogy to limb apraxia. Different possible subtypes of AOS are reviewed, along with their empirical support and limitations. Empirical evidence, particularly in the context of a progressive disease, supports the idea that AOS diagnosis may capture different underlying impairments of speech motor planning. Future research to advance our understanding of AOS should carefully consider the basis for subtype classification, and include large sample sizes to differentiate individual variability from possible subtypes.
conclusionsSeveral proposed AOS subtypes have found some support in the literature. Further research is needed to determine the validity, coherence and utility of possible AOS subtypes for theoretical and clinical purposes.
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.