Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40314430›Full record

ArticleClinical linguistics & phonetics2026

Phonemic simplification in apraxia of speech and aphasia with phonemic paraphasia.

Katarina L Haley, Jessica D Richardson, Tyson G Harmon, Peter Turkeltaub, Adam Jacks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical linguistics & phonetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Katarina L HaleyDivision of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Department of Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1158-2160
Jessica D RichardsonDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2769-3014
Tyson G HarmonDepartment of Communication Disorders, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1936-8668
Peter TurkeltaubDepartment of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2080-6055
Adam JacksDivision of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Department of Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6358-2878

Funding

Speech profiles and cue responsiveness in primary progressive aphasiaR01DC018569 · NIDCD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HALEY, KATARINA L · 2020 to 2024
$2.8M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC018569
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are varied reports about the extent to which people with apraxia of speech (AOS) simplify the phonemic complexity of utterances they attempt to produce and whether the degree to which they do so might inform differential diagnosis relative to aphasia with phonemic paraphasia (APP). Our study purpose was to determine whether either or both diagnostic groups simplify the phonemic content for words they repeat during a typical motor speech evaluation. 195 people with aphasia after stroke were assigned to four diagnostic groups based on quantitative metrics of core speech criteria for AOS and APP. In addition to the target groups, the sample was divided into a borderline group with equivocal feature combinations (BL) and a group with minimal sound production errors (MIN). Monosyllabic, disyllabic, and multisyllabic words were transcribed phonetically and scored for phonemic complexity. The ratio of produced complexity relative to target complexity - the word complexity measure (WCM) ratio - was compared across groups. According to the WCM ratio, participants in all four groups, including the group with minimal speech sound involvement, simplified more productions than they complicated. Those who produced the most speech sound errors also displayed greater phonemic simplification. People with stroke-induced aphasia sometimes produce words that are phonemic complications of targets, but more often they simplify the phonemic output. We conclude that phonemic simplification at the word level has limited value for differentiating clinically between AOS and APP. Future research should consider comparing alternative simplification measures.

Indexed as

AphasiaApraxiasPhoneticsSpeechAdultAgedDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSpeech Production MeasurementStrokedifferential diagnosisphonemic paraphasiaPhonetic transcriptionsimplificationword complexity measure

Identifiers

PMID40314430
PMCPMC13502991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.