ArticleJournal of neuropsychology2025
Multifactorial interplay on language recovery following left-hemispheric stroke: A retrospective study.
Article in Journal of neuropsychology, 2025. 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.
- Multifactorial interplay on language recovery following left-hemispheric stroke: A retrospective study.Journal of neuropsychology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the relative contribution of various factors influencing initial severity of aphasia and recovery after a stroke is essential for optimising neurorehabilitation programmes. We investigated how various significant sociodemographic, cognitive, clinical, stroke-related and rehabilitation-related factors modulate aphasia severity and language recovery following left-hemispheric stroke. Employing an innovative method, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 96 stroke participants to explore the combined impact of these factors. The initial severity of aphasia was categorised into severe, mild/moderate and no aphasia based on the severity of their language deficits in the subacute phase (Aphasia Severity Rating Scale, ASRS). To assess speech-and-language recovery, we classified 53/96 patients with aphasia into high and poor recovery categories using a gain score formula (ASRS_discharge-ASRS_admission)/ASRS_admission. Subsequently, we performed statistical analyses (univariate analyses and forward stepwise logistic regression combined with bootstrap) to identify the determinants of the initial severity of aphasia and the degree of recovery. Our analyses unveiled that more severe aphasia initially was correlated with a more severe stroke (Odds Ratio, OR = .90, p = .041), moderate/severe executive dysfunction (OR = .068, p < .001) and larger lesion size (OR = .068, p < .001). Furthermore, the degree of recovery was associated with the intensity of speech-and-language therapy (OR = 1.47, p = .043). These findings enrich our understanding of the determinants of aphasia severity and language recovery, employing an original methodology to scrutinise the collective effect of multiple variables in a retrospective analysis of stroke participants. A better knowledge of these factors may help implement personalised language rehabilitation programmes to maximise speech-and-language recovery.
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.