ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2023
Errorless, Errorful, and Retrieval Practice for Naming Treatment in Aphasia: A Scoping Review of Learning Mechanisms and Treatment Ingredients.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rehabilitation of post-stroke aphasia by a single protocol targeting phonological, lexical, and semantic deficits with speech output tasks: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2025Trial
- Article
- Developing Cognitive Control Training for Aphasia: Insights From Treatment Theory and Enablement Theory.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2026Review
- Cognitive Functions Supporting Learning Over Time in Naming Treatment for Aphasia.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
- Errorless and errorful learning in people with aphasia across novel-object pairing and word retrieval tasks.Aphasiology · 2024Article
- An electrophysiological and behavioral investigation of feedback-based learning in aphasia.Aphasiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Theory-driven treatment modifications: A discussion on meeting the linguistic, cognitive, and psychosocial needs of individual clients with aphasia.Journal of communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIncreasingly, mechanisms of learning are being considered during aphasia rehabilitation. Well-characterized learning mechanisms can inform "how" interventions should be administered to maximize the acquisition and retention of treatment gains. This systematic scoping review mapped hypothesized mechanisms of action (MoAs) and treatment ingredients in three learning-based approaches targeting naming in aphasia: errorless learning (ELess), errorful learning (EFul), and retrieval practice (RP). The rehabilitation treatment specification system was leveraged to describe available literature and identify knowledge gaps within a unified framework.
methodPubMed and CINHAL were searched for studies that compared ELess, EFul, and/or RP for naming in aphasia. Independent reviewers extracted data on proposed MoAs, treatment ingredients, and outcomes.
resultsTwelve studies compared ELess and EFul, six studies compared ELess and RP, and one study compared RP and EFul. Hebbian learning, gated Hebbian learning, effortful retrieval, and models of incremental learning via lexical access were proposed as MoAs. To maximize treatment outcomes within theorized MoAs, researchers manipulated study ingredients including cues, scheduling, and feedback. Outcomes in comparative effectiveness studies were examined to identify ingredients that may influence learning. Individual-level variables, such as cognitive and linguistic abilities, may affect treatment response; however, findings were inconsistent across studies.
conclusionsSignificant knowledge gaps were identified and include (a) which MoAs operate during ELess, EFul, and RP; (b) which ingredients are active and engage specific MoAs; and (c) how individual-level variables may drive treatment administration. Theory-driven research can support or refute MoAs and active ingredients enabling clinicians to modify treatments within theoretical frameworks.
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.