ArticleCoDAS2021
Clustering and switching in verbal fluency: a comparison between control and individuals with brain damage.
Article in CoDAS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Executive functions in primary progressive aphasia: A meta-analysis.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2022Pooled it
- Leveraging relatedness-based measures in people with language disorders: A scoping review.Journal of neuropsychology · 2025Article
- Mechanisms of Verbal Fluency Impairment in Stroke: Insights From "Strategic Indices" Derived From a Study of 337 Patients.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Longitudinal changes in qualitative aspects of semantic fluency in presymptomatic and prodromal genetic frontotemporal dementia.Journal of neurology · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study is to analyze and compare the performance and strategies used by control subjects and patients with unilateral brain damage on phonemic and semantic Verbal Fluency tasks.
methodsThe sample consisted of 104 participants divided into four groups (26 with left hemisphere damage and aphasia- LHDa, 28 with left hemisphere damage and no aphasia- LHDna, 25 with right hemisphere damage- RHD and 25 neurologically healthy control subjects). All participants were administered the phonemic ("M" letter-based) and semantic (animals) verbal fluency tasks from the Montreal-Toulouse Language Assessment Battery (MTL-BR).
resultsPatients in the LHDa group showed the worst performance (fewer words produced, fewer clusters and switches) in both types of fluency task. RHD group showed fewer switching productions when compared with controls and LHDna had fewer words productions than controls in the first 30 seconds block.
conclusionOur findings suggest that the LHDa group obtained lower scores in most measures of SVF and PVF when compared to the other groups.
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.