ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2022
The Subjective Experience of Word-Finding Difficulties in People With Aphasia: A Thematic Analysis of Interview Data.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2022. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- R-SPEAK, an AI-Based Smartphone App to Enhance Communication in People With Expressive Aphasia: Qualitative Acceptability and Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- An Observational Examination of Circumlocution Ability in Acute Left-Hemisphere Stroke Survivors as a Possible Estimative Behavioral Measure of Very Mild Aphasia.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2026Observational
- How object naming dissociates from repetition and comprehension impairments when post stroke aphasia is less severe.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Communication makes intensive language therapy more efficient: a randomized controlled trial in chronic post-stroke aphasia.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Moving Toward Anti-Ableist Practices in Aphasia Rehabilitation and Research: A Viewpoint.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAnomia, or difficulty with naming and word finding, is a pervasive deficit among individuals with aphasia. There is an extensive literature on the mechanisms underlying anomia and on approaches to treatment, but very little is known about the subjective experience of anomia during day-to-day life.
methodAs part of a larger testing battery, 53 adults with poststroke aphasia took part in a novel, structured interview that included an open-ended question about the general experience of anomia: "Do you ever know what you want to say, but you can't say it out loud? Please describe that feeling." Video-recorded interview responses were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis, an iterative, data-driven process that categorizes interview data into common themes.
resultsFive main themes emerged among the data from 37 participants who produced adequate responses for use in thematic analysis: strategies to cope with or compensate for anomia, comments on awareness of the level of breakdown (e.g., "I have an idea, but can't get the right words"), negative emotions, impact on relationships, and changes in frequency over time.
conclusionsParticipants showed strong awareness of anomia and its implications, demonstrating an ability to describe their language breakdown, identify relevant strategies to compensate and/or cope, and acknowledge the impact of anomia on their emotions and social interactions. This patient perspective may serve as a valuable supplement to information typically gained via objective language assessments. Clinicians and researchers may wish to consider incorporating similar subjective measures during assessment and treatment planning. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15032643.
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.