ArticleCortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior2024
Speech perception and language comprehension in primary progressive aphasia.
Article in Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Concepts of Understanding in the Working Practice of Speech and Language Therapists in the UK: A Preliminary Survey.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
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
Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by progressive loss of speech and language. Although speech perception and language comprehension deficits are observed in individuals with PPA, these deficits have been understudied relative to production deficits. Recent work has examined receptive language processing at sublexical, lexical, and semantic levels in PPA; however, systematic investigation of these levels of processing within a single PPA cohort is lacking. The current study sought to fill this gap. Individuals with logopenic, nonfluent, and semantic variants of PPA and healthy, age-matched controls completed minimal pairs syllable discrimination, auditory lexical decision, and picture-word verification tasks to assess sublexical, lexical, and semantic processing. Distinct profiles were observed across PPA variants. Individuals with logopenic variant PPA had impaired performance on auditory lexical decision and picture-word verification tasks, with a trend toward impaired performance on the syllable discrimination task. Individuals with nonfluent and semantic variant PPA had impaired performance only on auditory lexical decision and picture-word verification. Evaluation of the types of errors made on the picture-word verification task (phonological and semantic) provided further insight into levels of deficits across the variants. Overall, the results indicate deficits in receptive processing at the lexical-phonological, lexical-semantic, and semantic levels in logopenic variant PPA, with a trend toward impaired sublexical processing. Deficits were observed at the lexical-semantic and semantic levels in semantic variant PPA, and lexical-phonological deficits were observed in nonfluent PPA, likely reflecting changes both in lexical-phonological processing as well as changes in predictive coding during perception. This study provides a more precise characterization of the linguistic profile of each PPA subtype for speech perception and language comprehension. The constellation of deficits observed in each PPA subtype holds promise for differential diagnosis and for informing models of intervention.
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.