Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38875279›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2024

A feasibility randomised waitlist-controlled trial of a personalised multi-level language treatment for people with aphasia: The remote LUNA study.

Lucy Dipper, Niamh Devane, Rachel Barnard, Nicola Botting, Mary Boyle, Lin Cockayne, Deborah Hersh, Carla Magdalani, Jane Marshall, Kate Swinburn and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase II
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05847023 (Linguistic Underpinnings of Narrative in Aphasia), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05847023 phase1completednot on this map

Linguistic Underpinnings of Narrative in Aphasia (LUNA): A Proof-of-concept Study of a Novel Discourse Treatment for Aphasia Using Personal Narratives

TypeinterventionalSponsorCity, University of LondonRan2020 to 2021Enrolled28ConditionsAphasia, StrokeArmsLUNA
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Lucy DipperDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5918-3898
Niamh DevaneDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8448-1478
Rachel BarnardWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Nicola BottingDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Mary BoyleMontclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, United States of America.
Lin CockayneDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Deborah HershCurtin School of Allied Health and EnAble Institute, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2466-0225
Carla MagdalaniDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Jane MarshallDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Kate SwinburnDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Madeline CruiceDepartment of Language and Communication Science, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStroke survivors with aphasia want to improve their everyday talking (discourse). In current UK practice, 90% of speech and language therapists believe discourse assessment and treatment is part of their role but are hampered by barriers in resources, time and expertise. There is a clinical need for well-articulated discourse assessment and treatments. LUNA is a multi-level treatment targeting words, sentences and discourse macrostructure in personal stories that addresses this clinical need.

objectivesThis study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of LUNA trial procedures in a randomised waitlist-controlled trial; and to evaluate preliminary efficacy.

methodsThis paper reports a phase II, waitlist-controlled, proof-of-concept feasibility trial. Participants with chronic aphasia (n = 28) were recruited from the community and randomised to an Immediate (n = 14) or Delayed (n = 14) group. LUNA treatment was delivered twice weekly for 10 weeks via the videoconferencing technology, Zoom. Feasibility was assessed in terms of participant recruitment and retention, adherence, missing data, and treatment fidelity. Preliminary treatment efficacy was assessed in terms of between group differences in outcome measures relating to discourse, language, and psychosocial state.

resultsThe remote LUNA trial was feasible: 85% of those eligible consented to the trial; trial retention was 86%; 87% of treatment sessions were delivered as scheduled, and 79% of participants completed 80%+ of the treatment programme; data was missing only for participants who withdrew; treatment fidelity was high at 92% adherence; and only one clinical outcome measure demonstrated ceiling effects. ANCOVA analysis of the clinical outcome measures revealed group differences with medium and large effect sizes, indicating, improvements in the production of words, sentences, discourse macrostructure, overall language functioning (WAB-R), and psychosocial state (VAMS) following LUNA treatment. For most outcomes measured, similar treatment benefits were suggested in a secondary, non-parametric analysis.

conclusionsLarge-scale evaluation of the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of LUNA is warranted and supported by these findings.

trial registrationClinical trials registration: NCT05847023 (clinical trials.gov).

Indexed as

AphasiaFeasibility StudiesLanguage TherapyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeWaiting Lists

Identifiers

PMID38875279
PMCPMC11178191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.