ReviewNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Stuttering: Our Current Knowledge, Research Opportunities, and Ways to Address Critical Gaps.
Review 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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Large-scale genome-wide analyses of stuttering.Nature genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Using the DIVA model to better understand speech motor disorders.Clinical linguistics & phonetics · 2026Article
- Reduced integrity in the frontal aslant tract's premotor connections is associated with dysfluency severity in stuttering.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Predicting the impact of stuttering in the school years.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A stuttering-associatedbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Challenges and Opportunities in Characterizing the Genetics of Stuttering: From Sample Acquisition to Functional Interpretation of the Genome.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Our understanding of the neurobiological bases of stuttering remains limited, hampering development of effective treatments that are informed by basic science. Stuttering affects more than 5% of all preschool-age children and remains chronic in approximately 1% of adults worldwide. As a condition that affects a most fundamental human ability to engage in fluid and spontaneous verbal communication, stuttering can have substantial psychosocial, occupational, and educational impacts on those who are affected. This article summarizes invited talks and breakout sessions that were held in June 2023 as part of a 2-day workshop sponsored by the US National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. The workshop encompassed topics including neurobiology, genetics, speech motor control, cognitive, social, and emotional impacts, and intervention. Updates on current research in these areas were summarized by each speaker, and critical gaps and priorities for future research were raised, and then discussed by participants. Research talks were followed by smaller, moderated breakout sessions intended to elicit diverse perspectives, including on the matter of defining therapeutic targets for stuttering. A major concern that emerged following participant discussion was whether priorities for treatment in older children and adults should focus on targeting core speech symptoms of stuttering, or on embracing effective communication regardless of whether the speaker exhibits overt stuttering. This article concludes with accumulated convergent points endorsed by most attendees on research and clinical priorities that may lead to breakthroughs with substantial potential to contribute to bettering the lives of those living with this complex speech disorder.
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.