Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35344392›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2022

Representation in Aphasia Research: An Examination of U.S. Treatment Studies Published Between 2009 and 2019.

Brandon Nguy, Yina M Quique, Robert Cavanaugh, William S Evans

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Toward Equity in Research on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities · 2023
    Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brandon NguyDepartment of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.ORCID 0000-0003-1751-6284
Yina M QuiqueCenter for Education in Health Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0001-9129-4742
Robert CavanaughDepartment of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.ORCID 0000-0002-2114-6565
William S EvansDepartment of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.ORCID 0000-0001-5124-3473
University of Pittsburgh · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001858 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI RADOMSKI, THOMAS, RUBIO, DORIS M · 2016 to 2025
$11.1M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001858
6 · The paper itself

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

AphasiaStrokeAged, 80 and overEthnicityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinority GroupsSurvivorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35344392
PMCPMC9567435
OpenAlexW4220698650

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.