Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42041828›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2026

Writing Abilities in Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Scoping Literature Review.

Valentina Esposito, Francesca Conca, Gaia C Santi, Stefano F Cappa, Eleonora Catricalà

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 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.

Valentina EspositoIstituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Milan Institute, 20138 Milan, Italy.
Francesca ConcaICoN Cognitive Neuroscience Center, Institute for Advanced Studies, IUSS, 27100 Pavia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1809-6541
Gaia C SantiIstituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Bari Institute, 70124 Bari, Italy.
Stefano F CappaICoN Cognitive Neuroscience Center, Institute for Advanced Studies, IUSS, 27100 Pavia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1003-3925
Eleonora CatricalàICoN Cognitive Neuroscience Center, Institute for Advanced Studies, IUSS, 27100 Pavia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven the central role of writing and typing in contemporary communication, integrating writing assessments into clinical practice is crucial for improving the diagnosis and management of primary progressive aphasia (PPA). This scoping review summarizes evidence on writing abilities in PPA, examining task types, their strengths and limitations, the linguistic features of stimuli, and the influence of language differences.

methodsA literature search was conducted using the Google Scholar and PubMed databases. We included papers published in peer-reviewed journals and written in English that present data from at least one PPA subject and report a quantitative score relative to a writing task. Fifty-one studies were included (forty-seven behavioral; four with neuroimaging).

resultsOverall, the literature is fragmented, with marked variability in task design and the control of psycholinguistic variables. Writing to dictation is the most frequently used task but fails to capture the full spectrum of writing impairments, whereas tasks tapping lexico-semantic, morpho-syntactic, and discourse-level abilities are rarely employed. At the syndromic description level, svPPA typically shows surface dysgraphia, nfvPPA presents phonological dysgraphia and agrammatic writing, and lvPPA displays mixed error profiles. Neuroimaging findings are highly heterogeneous.

conclusionsThe review underscores the need for systematic, linguistically grounded approaches to writing assessments in PPA to enhance diagnostic precision and cross-linguistic comparability.

Indexed as

languageprimary progressive aphasiawriting abilities

Identifiers

PMID42041828
PMCPMC13114305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.