Trial reportArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2022
Complexity and Feedback During Script Training in Aphasia: A Feasibility Study.
Trial report in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2022. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Effectiveness of Technology-Based Interventions in Aphasia Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.International journal of language & communication disordersPooled it
- Treatment of aphasia in linguistically diverse populations: current and future directions.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Current status of Tele-speech language therapy by type and support for patients with post-stroke aphasia: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- Behavioral, Functional Imaging, and Neurophysiological Outcomes of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Speech-Language Therapy in an Individual with Aphasia.Brain sciences · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the effect of complexity and feedback on script training outcomes in aphasia
designRandomized balanced single-blind 2 × 2 factorial design.
settingFreestanding urban rehabilitation hospital.
participantsAdults with fluent and nonfluent aphasia (at least 6 months post onset).
interventionsExperimental treatment was AphasiaScripts, a computer-based script training program. Scripts were 10-turns long and developed at different complexity levels to allow for comparison of high vs low complexity. The program was modified to contrast high vs low feedback conditions during sentence practice. Participants were instructed to practice three 30-minute sessions per day, 6 days per week for 3 weeks.
main outcome measuresGains achieved from baseline in accuracy and rate of production of trained and untrained script sentences at post treatment and at 3-, 6-, and 12-weeks after the end of treatment.
resultsSixteen participants completed the intervention. On the trained script, gains were statistically significant for both accuracy and words per minute at post treatment and 3-, 6-, and 12-week maintenance. Gains on the untrained script were smaller than on the trained script; they were statistically significant only for accuracy at post treatment and 3-week maintenance. Complexity had an influence on accuracy at post-treatment (F
conclusionsThis study reinforces script training as a treatment option for aphasia. Results highlight the use of more complex scripts to better promote acquisition and maintenance of script production skills. There is a need for further investigation of these variables with larger samples and with other types of aphasia treatments.
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.