ArticleBrain communications2024
Mapping sentence comprehension and syntactic complexity: evidence from 131 stroke survivors.
Article in Brain communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Aphasia Physical EXercise (APEX) study: feasibility of a new high-intensity functional interval training for stroke survivors with aphasia.Aphasiology · 2026Article
- How object naming dissociates from repetition and comprehension impairments when post stroke aphasia is less severe.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Fixel-Based White Matter Correlates of Sentence Comprehension in Post-Stroke Aphasia.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Editorial: Revisiting a 150-year-old conundrum on the role of Broca's area in language processing: embracing expected and unexpected results.Frontiers in language sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding and interpreting how words are organized in a sentence to convey distinct meanings is a cornerstone of human communication. The neural underpinnings of this ability, known as syntactic comprehension, are far from agreed upon in current neurocognitive models of language comprehension. Traditionally, left frontal regions (e.g. left posterior inferior frontal gyrus) were considered critical, while more recently, left temporal regions (most prominently, left posterior middle temporal gyrus) have been identified as more indispensable to syntactic comprehension. Syntactic processing has been investigated by using different types of non-canonical sentences i.e. those that do not follow prototypical word order and are considered more syntactically complex. However, non-canonical sentences can be complex for different linguistic reasons, and thus, their comprehension might rely on different neural underpinnings. In this cross-sectional study, we explored the neural correlates of syntactic comprehension by investigating the roles of left hemisphere brain regions and white matter pathways in processing sentences with different levels of syntactic complexity. Participants were assessed at a single point in time using structural MRI and behavioural tests. Employing lesion-symptom mapping and indirect structural disconnection mapping in a cohort of 131 left hemisphere stroke survivors, our analysis revealed the following left temporal regions and underlying white matter pathways as crucial for general sentence comprehension: the left mid-posterior superior temporal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus and superior temporal sulcus and the inferior longitudinal fasciculus, the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, the middle longitudinal fasciculus, the uncinate fasciculus and the tracts crossing the most posterior part of the corpus callosum. We further found significant involvement of different white matter tracts connecting the left temporal and frontal lobes for different sentence types. Spared connections between the left temporal and frontal regions were critical for the comprehension of non-canonical sentences requiring long-distance retrieval (spared superior longitudinal fasciculus for both subject and object extraction and spared arcuate fasciculus for object extraction) but not for comprehension of non-canonical passive sentences and canonical declarative sentences. Our results challenge traditional language models that emphasize the primary role of the left frontal regions, such as Broca's area, in basic sentence structure comprehension. Our findings suggest a gradient of syntactic complexity, rather than a clear-cut dichotomy between canonical and non-canonical sentence structures. Our findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the neural architecture of language comprehension and highlight potential directions for future research.
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.