ArticleAphasiology2024
Recursive Self-feedback Improved Speech Fluency in Two Patients with Chronic Nonfluent Aphasia.
Article in Aphasiology, 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.
- Recursive self-feedback enables target language production in aphasia with pathological language mixing.Brain and language · 2025Article
- Treatment of aphasia in linguistically diverse populations: current and future directions.Frontiers in psychology · 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
Background: Previous studies have demonstrated that people with nonfluent aphasia (PWNA) improve their language production after repeating personalized scripts, modeled by speech-language pathologists (SLPs). If PWNA could improve by using their own self-feedback, relying less on external feedback, barriers to aphasia treatment, such as a dearth of clinicians and mobility issues, can be overcome. Here we examine whether PWNA improve their language production through an automated procedure that exposes them to playbacks of their own speech, which are updated recursively, without any feedback from SLPs. Method: We tested if recursive self-feedback could improve speech fluency in two persons with chronic nonfluent aphasia. We compared two treatments: script production with recursive self-feedback (a new technique) and a non-self-feedback training. We administered the treatments remotely to the participants through their smartphones using two versions of a mobile app we developed. Each participant engaged in each treatment for about three weeks. We estimated clinical improvements of script production through a quantitative trend analysis and nonoverlap of all pairs. Results: Recursive self-feedback improved speaking rate and speech initiation latency of trained and untrained scripts in both participants. The control (non-self-feedback) training was also effective, but it induced a somewhat weaker improvement in speaking rate, and improved speech initiation latency in only one participant. Conclusion: Our findings provide preliminary evidence that PWNA can improve their speaking rate and speech initiation latency during production of scripts via fully automated recursive self-feedback. The beneficial effects of recursive self-feedback training suggest that speech unison and repeated exposures to written scripts may be optional ingredients of script-based treatments for aphasia.
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.