ArticleAphasiology2023
Core lexicon in aphasia: A longitudinal study.
Article in Aphasiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Observational Examination of Circumlocution Ability in Acute Left-Hemisphere Stroke Survivors as a Possible Estimative Behavioral Measure of Very Mild Aphasia.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2026Observational
- Neural tracking of natural speech: an effective marker for post-stroke aphasia.Brain communications · 2025Article
- Access to context-specific lexical-semantic information during discourse tasks differentiates speakers with latent aphasia, mild cognitive impairment, and cognitively healthy adults.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Written discourse in diagnosis for acquired neurogenic communication disorders: current evidence and future directions.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Review
- Development and Real-Time Clinical Application of New Transcription-Less Discourse Assessment Approaches for Arabic Speakers With Aphasia.International journal of language & 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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: General consensus exists between clinicians as to the incorporation of discourse outcome measures into language assessment for persons with aphasia (PWA). The development of core lexicon measures (CoreLex) has enabled clinicians to reduce time and labor intensive preparatory work for discourse analysis, which has been considered as an alternative measure to quantify word retrieval ability in discourse in a clinical context. Although previous studies have investigated the quality of the measure, CoreLex has rarely been longitudinally explored. Aims: We aimed to investigate the adequacy of CoreLex to document linguistic changes in PWA over time. Specifically, we examined (1) whether natural language recovery from acute to chronic stages is manifested differentially by tasks and (2) the extent to which the ability to retrieve words in isolation predicts the ability to retrieve words in context. Methods: A total of 19 PWA participated in the study. They completed a language assessment including confrontation naming tasks (Boston Naming Test [BNT] and Hopkins Action Naming Assessment [HANA]) and a picture description task using the Cookie Theft picture at acute and chronic stages. Discourse samples from the picture description task were quantified using CoreLex. Results: We found significant differences across tasks and time-points by PWA. Moderate correlations between the confrontation naming tasks and CoreLex were found at the acute stage but not at the chronic stage. Additionally, McNemar's tests demonstrated a significant difference in PWA's performance in CoreLex from the acute to the chronic stages. Conclusions: Our findings show that performance by PWA improves over time on all tasks, but language gains are manifested differentially by tasks. Performance in confrontation naming moderately predicts word retrieval in context acutely. However, lack of correlations between confrontation naming tasks and CoreLex later endorse inadequacy of using confrontation naming tasks as a proxy measure for discourse-level performance and improvement for PWA.
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.