ReviewAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2021
Is There a Research-Practice Dosage Gap in Aphasia Rehabilitation?
Review 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 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Benefits of Conversation Group Treatment for Individuals With Chronic Aphasia: Updated Evidence From a Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial on Measures of Language and Communication.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Trial
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined With Multimodality Aphasia Therapy for Chronic Poststroke Aphasia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Neurology · 2025Trial
- Article
- Revisiting Western Aphasia Battery-Revised in the Context of Mild Impairment.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2026Article
- Examining aphasia rehabilitation in Colombia from the perspective of speech-language pathologists and neuropsychologists: a pilot study.Aphasiology · 2025Article
- Perspectives on how evidence-based practice changes over time: A qualitative exploration of occupational therapy and physical therapy graduates.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Charting the Course of Aphasia Recovery: Factors, Trajectories, and Outcomes.Annual review of linguistics · 2025Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of In-Person and Virtual Picture-Naming Treatment for Poststroke Anomia.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Article
- Establishing Quality Indicators and Implementation Priorities for Post-Stroke Aphasia Services Through End-User Involvement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Efficacy of a gamified digital therapy for speech production in people with chronic aphasia (iTalkBetter): behavioural and imaging outcomes of a phase II item-randomised clinical trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Comprehensive quality assessment for aphasia rehabilitation after stroke: protocol for a multicentre, mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- A computer-aid speech rehabilitation system with mirrored video generating.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024Article
- Consistent long-term practice leads to consistent improvement: Benefits of self-managed therapy for language and cognitive deficits using a digital therapeutic.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Dosage Frequency Effects on Treatment Outcomes Following Self-managed Digital Therapy: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Representation in Aphasia Research: An Examination of U.S. Treatment Studies Published Between 2009 and 2019.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022Review
- Article
- Theory-driven treatment modifications: A discussion on meeting the linguistic, cognitive, and psychosocial needs of individual clients with aphasia.Journal of communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose Aphasia intervention research aims to improve communication and quality of life outcomes for people with aphasia. However, few studies have evaluated the translation and implementation of evidence-based aphasia interventions to clinical practice. Treatment dosage may be difficult to translate to clinical settings, and a mismatch between dosage in research and clinical practice threatens to attenuate intervention effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to quantify a potential research-practice dosage gap in outpatient aphasia rehabilitation. Method This study utilized a two-part approach. First, we estimated clinical treatment dosage in an episode of care (i.e., treatment provided from outpatient assessment to discharge) via utilization in a regional provider in the United States. Second, we undertook a scoping review of aphasia interventions published from 2009 to 2019 to estimate the typical dosage used in the current aphasia literature. Results Outpatient clinical episodes of care included a median of 10 treatment sessions and a mean of 14.8 sessions (interquartile range: 5-20 sessions). Sessions occurred 1-2 times a week over 4-14 weeks. The median total hours of treatment was 7.5 hr (interquartile range: 3.75-15 hr). In contrast, published interventions administered a greater treatment dosage, consisting of a median of 20 hr of treatment (interquartile range: 12-30 hr) over the course of 15 sessions (interquartile range: 10-24 sessions) approximately 3 times per week. Conclusions Results demonstrate a meaningful research-practice dosage gap, particularly in total treatment hours and weekly treatment intensity. This gap highlights the potential for attenuation of effectiveness from research to outpatient settings. Future translational research should consider clinical dosage constraints and take steps to facilitate intervention implementation, particularly with regard to dosage. Conversely, health care advocacy and continued development of alternative delivery methods are necessary for the successful implementation of treatments with dosage that is incompatible with current clinical contexts. Pragmatic, implementation-focused trials are recommended to evaluate and optimize treatment effectiveness in outpatient clinical settings. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15161568.
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.