ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
A Meta-Analytical Review of Executive Function Skills in Adults who Stutter.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Executive function has been identified as a potential area of vulnerability in individuals who stutter. The present study identified and analyzed the data across empirical studies of the executive function skills of adults who do (AWS) and do not stutter (AWNS). Method: Electronic databases, literature reviews, and reference sections of articles and dissertations were searched to identify candidate studies that examined behavioral measures of working memory, inhibition, and/or cognitive flexibility. A total of 39 studies met the eligibility criteria for this meta-analysis. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the pooled effect sizes (Hedges' Results: AWS were significantly less accurate than AWNS on measures of working memory (Hedges' Conclusions: Present findings suggest that AWS, as a group, exhibit weaknesses in one component of executive function - working memory - compared to AWNS. Additional research is necessary to determine potential differences in inhibition and cognitive flexibility in AWS.
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.