ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2024
Memory for Conversation in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Feasibility Study and Preliminary Findings.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 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.
- A Scoping Review on Conversational Memory and Characteristics of Conversations in Alzheimer's Disease.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
- Multiparty Communication: A New Direction in Characterizing the Impact of Traumatic Brain Injury on Social Communication.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Review
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
purposeDespite common clinical complaints about memory for conversation after traumatic brain injury (TBI), the nature and severity of this deficit are unknown. In this research note, we report feasibility and preliminary data from a new conversation memory study protocol.
methodParticipants in this feasibility study were 10 pairs, each including an adult with chronic, moderate-to-severe TBI and their chosen familiar conversation partner. The experiment began with a naturalistic conversation between participants with TBI and their conversation partners. After a filled delay, participants next completed verbal recall for the conversation, which we transcribed and coded for their accuracy relative to the original conversation. Participants also read chosen statements from their original conversation and predicted what each partner would remember in a week. One week later, participants completed a posttest about who said each of the chosen statements, allowing direct comparison to their predictions.
resultsWe successfully collected conversation memory data from all 10 pairs, suggesting that this protocol is feasible for future study. In this preliminary sample, people with TBI and their conversation partners did not differ in the accuracy of their recall for the conversation about 20 min after it occurred. When asked to predict their partner's delayed memory, conversation partners were less accurate than participants with TBI because they underestimated how much their partners with TBI would remember.
conclusionMeasuring memory for conversation in TBI is feasible and may advance the characterization of cognitive-communication impairment in TBI, and its heterogeneity, in everyday contexts. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25927513.
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.