Cited by 11Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersReading and Literacy Development

Multilevel factors predict treatment response following semantic feature-based intervention in bilingual aphasia

Open access
Scimeca, Michael, Peñaloza, Claudia, Kiran, Swathi·2024·Bilingualism: Language and Cognition

Abstract

Semantic feature-based treatments (SFTs) are effective rehabilitation strategies for word retrieval deficits in bilinguals with aphasia (BWA). However, few studies have prospectively evaluated the effects of key parameters of these interventions on treatment outcomes. This study examined the influence of intervention-level (i.e., treatment language and treatment sessions), individual-level (baseline naming severity and age), and stimulus-level (i.e., lexical frequency, phonological length, and phonological neighborhood density) factors on naming improvement in a treated and untreated language for 34 Spanish–English BWA who completed 40 hours of SFT. Results revealed significant improvement over time in both languages. In the treated language, individuals who received therapy in their L1 improved more. Additionally, higher pre-treatment naming scores predicted greater response to treatment. Finally, a frequency effect on baseline naming accuracy and phonological effects on accuracy over time were associated with differential treatment gains. These findings indicate that multilevel factors are influential predictors of bilingual treatment outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1366728923000391

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other studies focusing solely on bilingual persons with aphasia have reported conflicting findings regarding the influence of aphasia severity in the treated and untreated languages on treated language improvement and cross-language generalization.

    “However, other studies focusing solely on bPWA have reported conflicting findings regarding the influence of aphasia severity in the treated and untreated languages on TLI and CLG7,10,29 underscoring the need for further research to clarify the contribution of these factors to treatment outcomes.”

    From Machine Learning Predictions of Recovery in Bilingual Poststroke Aphasia: Aligning Insights With Clinical Evidence (2025) · cites this paper as [7]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In semantic feature therapy (SFT), greater language system integrity may facilitate the spread of activation to related semantic nodes, promoting generalization to untreated items and cross-language transfer.

    “In SFT, greater language system integrity may facilitate the spread of activation to related semantic nodes, promoting generalization to untreated items and cross-language transfer7,11.”

    From Machine Learning Predictions of Recovery in Bilingual Poststroke Aphasia: Aligning Insights With Clinical Evidence (2025) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Treatment type section proposes spreading activation as a mechanism for cross-language generalization after SFT. Outcomes in the untreated language reports greater generalization among participants with better baseline naming performance. But the Items section says this study did not analyze semantically related untreated items, so it does not establish spread to those items or semantic nodes; the observed cross-language gains concerned translations of trained items, not distinct untreated words. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Various approaches, including cognitive-based, cognate-based, and semantic-feature-based treatments, have shown efficacy in producing treated language improvement.

    “Various approaches, including cognitive-based4, cognate-based4,5, and semantic-featured-based treatments (SFT)6–11 have shown efficacy in producing treated language improvement (TLI).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Gordon, J., & Dell, G. S. (2001). Phonological neighborhood effects: Evidence from aphasia and connectionist modeling. Brain and Language, 79(1), 21-23. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2574 · DOI
  2. Howard, D., & Patterson, K. (1992). Pyramids and Palm Trees Test. Pearson.
  3. Michael Scimeca, Claudia Peñaloza and Swathi Kiran https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728923000391 Published online by Cambridge University Press
  4. Peñaloza, C., & Kiran, S. (2019). Recovery and rehabilitation patterns in bilin- gual and multilingual aphasia. In J. Schwieter & M. Paradis (Eds.), The Handbook of the Neuroscience of Multilingualism (pp. 553-571).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scimeca, M., Peñaloza, C., & Kiran, S.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • Institut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge (ES)
Corresponding author
Scimeca, Michael
Venue
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
Published
2023-08-22
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
246-262
ISSN
  • 1366-7289 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1841
OpenAlex
W4386073747
Cited by
11
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bilingualism Language and Cognition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OpenBU (Boston University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (U01 DC014922)
  • Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (IJC2018-037818)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
bilingual aphasia, word retrieval, naming, Spanish-English bilinguals, word frequency, phonological neighborhood density, predictors of treatment response, multilevel factors, aphasia rehabilitation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review