Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34411485›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2021

Is There a Research-Practice Dosage Gap in Aphasia Rehabilitation?

Robert Cavanaugh, Christina Kravetz, Lillian Jarold, Yina Quique, Rose Turner, William S Evans

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Revisiting Western Aphasia Battery-Revised in the Context of Mild Impairment.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A computer-aid speech rehabilitation system with mirrored video generating.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Robert CavanaughDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.
Christina KravetzCenters for Rehab Services, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, PA.ORCID 0000-0002-2114-6565
Lillian JaroldDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.
Yina QuiqueCenter for Education in Health Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0001-9129-4742
Rose TurnerHealth Sciences Library System, University of Pittsburgh, PA.ORCID 0000-0002-3938-5513
William S EvansDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.ORCID 0000-0001-5124-3473

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR001857 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2016 to 2025
$129.3M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001858 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI RADOMSKI, THOMAS, RUBIO, DORIS M · 2016 to 2025
$11.1M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001858NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001857
6 · The paper itself

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

AphasiaQuality of LifeCommunicationDelivery of Health CareHumans

Identifiers

PMID34411485
PMCPMC8702848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.