ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2026
Revisiting Western Aphasia Battery-Revised in the Context of Mild Impairment.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subtle language deficits in WAB-recovered patients at 12 months after left-hemisphere stroke.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised Aphasia Quotient (WAB-R AQ) cutoff of 93.7 of 100 in detecting atypical discourse observed on a picture description task and to identify the optimal AQ value for detection of aphasia.
methodA total of 171 English-speaking adults with a diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke completed both the WAB-R and a description of either the
resultsThe current AQ cutoff score was accurate in detecting aphasic discourse in 75% of cases (sensitivity = 77%; specificity = 64%). Most inaccurate classifications were due to the nearly one in five patients who demonstrated aphasic discourse but were deemed not aphasic by the WAB-R (false negatives). The optimal AQ cutoff was 96.7, calculated by maximizing Cohen's kappa (.38). This cutoff increased classification accuracy from 75% to 83% and reduced false negatives from 19% to 9%.
conclusionIncreasing the WAB-R AQ cutoff to 96.7 is an easily implementable adjustment that improves the detection of aphasia.
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.