The DOI matches its Crossref record; 111 of the 111 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Systematic Review of Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy Studies for Aphasia
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to review treatment studies of semantic feature analysis (SFA) for persons with aphasia. The review documents how SFA is used, appraises the quality of the included studies, and evaluates the efficacy of SFA. Method: The following electronic databases were systematically searched (last search February 2017): Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus, E-journals, Health Policy Reference Centre, MEDLINE, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, and SocINDEX. The quality of the included studies was rated. Clinical efficacy was determined by calculating effect sizes (Cohen's d ) or percent of nonoverlapping data when d could not be calculated. Results: Twenty-one studies were reviewed reporting on 55 persons with aphasia. SFA was used in 6 different types of studies: confrontation naming of nouns, confrontation naming of verbs, connected speech/discourse, group, multilingual, and studies where SFA was compared with other approaches. The quality of included studies was high (Single Case Experimental Design Scale average [range] = 9.55 [8.0–11]). Naming of trained items improved for 45 participants (81.82%). Effect sizes indicated that there was a small treatment effect. Conclusions: SFA leads to positive outcomes despite the variability of treatment procedures, dosage, duration, and variations to the traditional SFA protocol. Further research is warranted to examine the efficacy of SFA and generalization effects in larger controlled studies.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“It is well established that inter-individual variability in TLI in post-stroke aphasia is influenced by an array of factors, including, but not limited to, age12–15, education16–19, aphasia severity11,14,15,20,21, baseline cognitive abilities13,22,23, and, specific to bPWA, bilingual language experience and language of treatment (e.g., whether therapy is delivered in L1 or L2)24,25.”
From Machine Learning Predictions of Recovery in Bilingual Poststroke Aphasia: Aligning Insights With Clinical Evidence (2025) · cites this paper as [21]
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · International Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007 · Cited by 12,156
A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.82.6.407 · Cited by 8,141
A theory of lexical access in speech production
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99001776 · Cited by 5,295
Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers.
Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.104.4.801 · Cited by 1,489
Western Aphasia Battery--Revised
Kertesz, A. (2012) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t15168-000 · Cited by 1,367
The Quantitative Synthesis of Single-Subject Research
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. C. (1987) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/074193258700800206 · Cited by 971
Evaluating Single-Subject Treatment Research: Lessons Learned from the Aphasia Literature
Beeson, P. M., & Robey, R. R. (2006) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-006-9013-7 · Cited by 549 · cited 2×
“The magnitude of change in performance was determined according to the benchmarks for lexical retrieval studies described by Beeson and Robey (2006).”
Therapy for naming disorders: Revisiting, revising, and reviewing
Nickels, L. (2002) · Aphasiology · doi:10.1080/02687030244000563 · Cited by 461
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Antonucci S. M., 2014, How do persons with aphasia use semantic feature information during lexical retrieval: Evidence from verbal-description and naming-to-definition of living and non-living concepts, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20, 34
- Busk P. L., 1992, Single-case research design and analysis, 187
- Davis G. A., 2000, Aphasiology: Disorders and clinical practice
- Gast D., 2010, Single subject research methodology in behavioural sciences
- Goodglass H., 2001, Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination–Third Edition: BDAE-3 Short Form
- Haarbauer-Krupa J., 1985, Head injury rehabilitation: Children and adolescents, 311
- Paradis M., 1987, The Bilingual Aphasia Test (English version)
- Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, 2010, Management of patients with stroke: Rehabilitation, prevention and management of complications, and discharge planning
- Ylvisaker M., 1985, Cognitive-language intervention with brain injured adolescents and adults
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Clough, S., & Duff, M. C. (2020) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2020.00323 · Cited by 157
Doedens, W., & Meteyard, L. (2022) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-021-09531-2 · Cited by 96
Delivering word retrieval therapies for people with aphasia in a virtual communication environment
Marshall, J., Devane, N., Edmonds, L., Talbot, R., Wilson, S., Woolf, C., & Zwart, N. (2018) · Aphasiology · doi:10.1080/02687038.2018.1488237 · Cited by 66
Kristinsson, S., den Ouden, D., Rorden, C., Newman‐Norlund, R., Neils‐Strunjas, J., & Fridriksson, J. (2022) · Journal of Stroke · doi:10.5853/jos.2022.01102 · Cited by 67
Ballard, K. J., Etter, N. M., Shen, S., Monroe, P., & Tien Tan, C. (2019) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2018_ajslp-msc18-18-0109 · Cited by 60
Metadata
- Authors
- Efstratiadou, E. A., Papathanasiou, I., Holland, R., Archonti, A., & Hilari, K.
- Affiliations
- University of London (GB)
- Technological Educational Institute of Western Greece (GR)
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Hilari, Katerina
- Venue
- Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
- Published
- 2018-05-17
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1261-1278
- ISSN
- 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-9102
- OpenAlex
- W2792725600
- Cited by
- 146
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 2.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Keywords
- semantic feature analysis, aphasia, aphasia rehabilitation, confrontation naming, noun naming, verb naming, connected speech, group therapy, treatment efficacy, effect size, single-case experimental design
- MeSH terms
- Aphasia, Humans, Semantics, Speech Therapy
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
