ArticleNeuropsychology2022
Assessing naming errors using an automated machine learning approach.
Article in Neuropsychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Differences in Connected Speech Outcomes Across Elicitation Methods.Aphasiology · 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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAfter left hemisphere stroke, 20%-50% of people experience language deficits, including difficulties in naming. Naming errors that are semantically related to the intended target (e.g., producing "violin" for picture HARP) indicate a potential impairment in accessing knowledge of word forms and their meanings. Understanding the cause of naming impairments is crucial to better modeling of language production as well as for tailoring individualized rehabilitation. However, evaluation of naming errors is typically by subjective and laborious dichotomous classification. As a result, these evaluations do not capture the degree of semantic similarity and are susceptible to lower interrater reliability because of subjectivity.
methodWe investigated whether a computational linguistic measure using word2vec (Mikolov, Chen, et al., 2013) addressed these limitations by evaluating errors during object naming in a group of patients during the acute stage of a left-hemisphere stroke (
resultsPearson correlations demonstrated excellent convergent validity of word2vec's semantically related estimates of naming errors and independent tests of access to lexical-semantic knowledge (
conclusionsUseful to both theorists and clinicians, our word2vec-based method provides an automated, continuous, and objective psychometric measure of access to lexical-semantic knowledge during naming. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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.