ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Semantic and Phonological Abilities Inform Efficacy of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Sustained Aphasia Treatment Outcomes.
Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noninvasive Brain Stimulation in Translational Cognitive Neuroscience-Applications in Aphasia and Beyond: 2025 H. Houston Merritt Award Lecture.Neurology · 2026Article
- Predicting Post-Stroke Aphasia Speech Performance from Multimodal Data with Explainable Machine Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Improving Lexicosemantic Impairments in Post-Stroke Aphasia Using rTMS Targeting the Right Anterior Temporal Lobe.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined with Speech-Language Therapy for Post-Stroke Aphasia Recovery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Review
- Advances in transcranial magnetic stimulation for psychological symptom management in Parkinson's disease.World journal of psychiatry · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A growing body of evidence has shown that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can enhance word-retrieval abilities in chronic aphasia. However, there remains significant variability in the efficacy of combined rTMS and language treatments. This study investigated how semantic and phonological characteristics of baseline word-retrieval impairments may influence the efficacy of rTMS on long-term naming improvements following language treatment in individuals with chronic aphasia. Thirty participants with post-stroke aphasia underwent 10 sessions of 1 Hz rTMS to right pars triangularis followed by a modified constraint-induced language treatment (mCILT). Nineteen participants were randomly assigned to active rTMS and 11 participants were assigned to sham rTMS. All participants completed the Philadelphia Naming Test (PNT) at baseline and at 3 and 6 months post-treatment. We coded PNT errors and fit data to the semantic-phonological (or SP) computational model (Foygel & Dell, 2000) to derive semantic and phonological parameter weights. We ran linear regressions for the proportional improvement in naming, with fixed effects for interactions between rTMS, time, and baseline parameter weights. While there was no immediate effect of rTMS post-treatment, rTMS combined with mCILT improved long-term naming more than language therapy alone. Furthermore, greater baseline semantic and phonological characteristics of word-retrieval abilities were each associated with increased rTMS-induced gains in proportional naming improvements. These patterns were maintained at both 3 and 6 months post-treatment. This study is among the first in a larger sample to demonstrate that individual differences in lexical retrieval contribute to variability in sustained rTMS and aphasia treatment outcomes.
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.