ArticleBrain sciences2024
Pragmatic Communication Deficit and Functional Outcome in Patients with Right- and Left-Brain Damage: A Pilot Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. 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.
- Assessment Battery for Communication (ABaCo): An Extension of Normative Data to Elderly Individuals.Journal of psycholinguistic research · 2026Article
- Glioma lateralization: Focus on the anatomical localization and the distribution of molecular alterations (Review).Oncology reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pragmatic communication abilities refer to the capacity to use language in a social context. Despite evidence to the contrary, the left cerebral hemisphere of the majority of right handers has been considered exclusively specialized for control of language phonology, syntax and semantics, whereas the right hemisphere has been specialized for the control of language pragmatics. Many studies have shown the non-exclusivity of the left hemisphere for language skills. Communication deficits observed in these studies for patients with right hemisphere damage confirmed the necessity for integrity of the right hemisphere across a number of language components. The aim of this study is to investigate the specific role of the right and left hemispheres across several aspects of communication deficits, with particular attention given to the influence of these deficits on functional outcome. The second aim is to characterize possible correlations between pragmatic and other cognitive deficits. We evaluated 22 patients, 15 with left- and 7 with right-brain ischemic or hemorrhagic damage, using cognitive, pragmatic and language tests. We deployed the Right Hemisphere Language Battery-Santa Lucia and Montreal d'Evaluation de la Communication to assess pragmatic abilities. The results showed no statistically significant differences between patients with left- and right-brain damage, highlighting the importance of integration between the two hemispheres in the communication process. Multiple significant correlations were found between pragmatic abilities and cognitive tests assessing global cognitive functioning, pantomime expression and comprehension. Pragmatic deficits were also shown to correlate with functional cognitive outcome. It is important to assess pragmatic abilities in patients with cognitive deficits after both left and right stroke for tailoring neuropsychological intervention to mitigate pragmatic disabilities in functional outcomes.
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.