ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Tracking priming-induced language recovery in aphasia with pre-trained language models.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the utility of large language models for detecting and simulating language dysfunction.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- AQFormer: severity-aware transformer with aphasia-specific CAM for spoken keyword classification in aphasic speech.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study explores the use of pre-trained language models (PLMs) in tracking priming treatment induced language recovery in aphasia. We evaluate PLM-derived surprisals, the negative log-probabilities of a word or a sequence of words calculated by a PLM given its preceding context, as a continuous and interpretable measure of treatment-induced language change. We found that surprisal scores decreased following structural priming treatment, especially in participants with more severe sentence production impairments. We also introduce a prompting-based pipeline for clinical classification tasks. It achieved promising results in classifying aphasia sentence correctness (F1 = 0.967) and detecting error categories in aphasia (accuracy = 0.846). Such use of PLMs for modeling, tracking, and automatically classifying language recovery in aphasia represents a promising deployment of GenAI in a clinical rehabilitation setting. Together, our PLM-based analyses offer a practical approach for modeling language rehabilitation, tracking not only language structure but also individual change over time in clinical contexts. Clinical trial registration: Identifier NTC05415501.
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.