Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42793362›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2026

Care Partner Perceptions of Conversation Difficulties, Strategy Use, and Psychosocial Impacts in Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Descriptive Study Using the PCI-DAT.

Angela C Roberts, Matthew Bona, Emily Rogalski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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

3 authors.

Angela C RobertsSchool of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western University, London, ON N6G 1H1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9226-8009
Matthew BonaThe Healthy Aging & Alzheimer's Research Care (HAARC) Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Emily RogalskiThe Healthy Aging & Alzheimer's Research Care (HAARC) Center, Department of Neurology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.

Funding

Communication Bridge: Optimizing an evidence-based intervention for individuals with primary progressive aphasiaR01AG055425 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI EMILY J ROGALSKI, Angela Christine Roberts · 2017 to 2026
$14.8M
Communication Bridge: A person-centered Internet-based intervention for individuals with primary progressive aphasiaR56AG055425 · NIA · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI ROBERTS, ANGELA CHRISTINE, ROGALSKI, EMILY J · 2022 to 2022
$2.2M
Canada Research Chairs CRC-2022-00089NIA NIH HHS R01 AG055425NIA NIH HHS R56 AG055425NIH HHS 1R56AG055425-05NIH HHS R01AG055425
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary progressive aphasia (PPA) disrupts communication and increases caregiving burden. Despite their critical role in supporting communication, objective data characterizing communication partners' perceptions of conversation difficulties, strategies, and psychosocial impacts across PPA subtypes remain scarce. This study characterizes these experiences using the Perception of Conversation Index-Dementia of the Alzheimer's Type (PCI-DAT) in a well-characterized PPA sample.

methodsBaseline PCI-DAT data from 95 communication partners of individuals with PPA enrolled in the Communication Bridge-2 (CB2) randomized controlled trial were analyzed. Descriptive analyses examined item- and subscale-level responses across five PCI-DAT subscales. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare subscale total scores across agrammatic (PPA-G, n = 26), logopenic (PPA-L, n = 43), and semantic (PPA-S, n = 26) PPA subtypes.

resultsCommunication partners endorsed a wide range of conversation difficulties, with using the correct word and pausing/searching for words being the most frequently and severely rated items. Across subtypes, partners reported frequent use and perceived helpfulness of compensatory actions, both their own and those used by the person with PPA. PPA-S care partners reported directionally higher emotional burden (Subscale 4: M = 24.46, SD = 10.96) and practical challenges (Subscale 5: M = 19.27, SD = 11.61). No statistically significant between-subtype differences emerged for any subscale (all

conclusionsThese findings characterize the breadth and heterogeneity of communication partner-perceived conversation difficulties and their psychosocial impacts in mild-to-moderate PPA. Substantial within-subtype variability supports individualized assessment and intervention planning.

Indexed as

caregiving burdencare partnercommunication strategiesconversation difficultiesPCI-DATprimary progressive aphasia

Identifiers

PMID42793362
PMCPMC13604639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.