ReviewAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2022
Representation in Aphasia Research: An Examination of U.S. Treatment Studies Published Between 2009 and 2019.
Review 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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stratified Efficacy and Peripheral Neuroinflammatory Mechanisms of Jin's Tongue Triple Acupuncture as Adjunctive Therapy for Subacute Post-Stroke Broca Aphasia: A 1:1 PSM Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2026Article
- Increasing Representation of Black Stroke Survivors in Aphasia Research: A Community Outreach Pilot.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Article
- Eight ways speech-language pathologists can contribute to health equity: the case of Black stroke survivors with aphasia.Aphasiology · 2025Article
- Diversity of Research Participant Gender, Race, and Ethnicity in Communication Sciences and Disorders: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Synthesis of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Publications in 2020.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2024Article
- Toward Equity in Research on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities · 2023Article
- Implementation of Open Science Practices in Communication Sciences and Disorders Research With Black, Indigenous, and People of Color.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe external validity of aphasia treatment research relies on diverse and representative participants. The purposes of this study were (a) to examine whether reporting of patient-reported age, sex, and race/ethnicity has improved since Ellis (2009) and (b) to evaluate whether these demographic variables were consistent with population-level estimates of stroke survivor demographics in the United States.
methodA scoping review examined U.S.-based aphasia treatment studies published between 2009 and 2019 and characterized the percentage of studies reporting age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Summary statistics for these variables were calculated and compared statistically with a population-based study of stroke survivors.
resultsIt was found out that 97.1% of studies reported age, 93.5% reported sex, and 28.1% reported race and/or ethnicity. Within reporting studies, participant mean age was 58.04 years, 61.6% of participants were men, and 38.4% were women; 86.5% of participants were White, 11.0% were Black, 2.0% were Hispanic/Latino, and 0.5% fell in other racial categories. All three variables were statistically different from the study of Kissela et al. (2012). DISCUSSION: Despite being highlighted as an issue by Ellis (2009), less than 30% of recent aphasia treatment studies reported race or ethnicity, and participants do not appear to be demographically representative compared with estimates of stroke survivors living in the United States. These issues may negatively impact the ecological validity of aphasia treatment research. Aphasia researchers should more consistently report participant race and ethnicity and follow current guidelines for increasing the demographic representation of women and minorities.
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.