Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42150834›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Type 3 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study implementing and evaluating the Comprehensive High-dose Aphasia Treatment (CHAT) programme in Australian rehabilitation services: a protocol.

Marie-Pier McSween, Jade K Dignam, Kirstine Shrubsole, Rachel Levine, Emma Power, Natasha A Lannin, Sarah J Wallace, Dominique A Cadilhac, Monique F Kilkenny, Annie J Hill and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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

12 authors.

Marie-Pier McSweenQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jade K DignamQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0366-6719
Kirstine ShrubsoleQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7805-2447
Rachel LevineQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Emma PowerGraduate School of Health, Speech Pathology, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Natasha A LanninDepartment of Neuroscience, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2066-8345
Sarah J WallaceQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0600-9343
Dominique A CadilhacStroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8162-682X
Monique F KilkennyStroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3375-287X
Annie J HillQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Brooke J RyanCurtin School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
David A CoplandQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia d.copland@uq.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Comprehensive High-dose Aphasia Treatment (CHAT) programme is an intensive comprehensive aphasia programme, which aims to address evidence-practice gaps in aphasia rehabilitation where there are known barriers to service delivery requiring implementation strategies. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the clinical implementation of the CHAT programme, (2) assess the clinical effectiveness of CHAT compared with usual care in rehabilitation services and (3) determine whether the real-world implementation of CHAT compared with usual care is cost-effective. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Four participant groups will be recruited across six hospital and health services Australia-wide to participate in a type 3 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study: (1) people with aphasia, (2) support persons, (3) treating clinicians and students and (4) clinical stakeholders (eg, managers). This before-and-after study will include three time periods: (1) 'usual care' where people with aphasia will receive their usual care aphasia therapy, (2) 'implementation transition' where clinicians will be trained to deliver CHAT and (3) 'intervention implementation' where people with aphasia will receive the CHAT programme (ie, 50 hours of evidence-based aphasia therapy over 8 weeks). Evidence-based implementation strategies will be used to facilitate implementation within participating rehabilitation services. The primary outcome is delivery of evidence-based aphasia treatment (ie, CHAT) as measured by a composite score of quality indicators. Clinical effectiveness outcomes, measuring change in language impairment, communication effectiveness, confidence and quality of life, and implementation outcomes will also be examined. We will also conduct an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation and economic evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/2021/QRBW/72154). Outputs will include conference presentations, publications and a training package to optimise implementation of aphasia treatment in rehabilitation service contexts. REGISTRATION DETAILS: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) prospective registration ACTRN12621001765819. Trial registered 23 December 2021. https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=381365&isReview=true.

Indexed as

AphasiaAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisFemaleHumansProgram EvaluationResearch DesignImplementation ScienceREHABILITATION MEDICINESpeech pathologyStroke

Identifiers

PMID42150834
PMCPMC13185025

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.