Cited by 25Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersReading and Literacy Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Language Mapping in Aphasia

Open access

Abstract

Purpose: Recovery from aphasia is thought to depend on neural plasticity, that is, functional reorganization of surviving brain regions such that they take on new or expanded roles in language processing. To make progress in characterizing the nature of this process, we need feasible, reliable, and valid methods for identifying language regions of the brain in individuals with aphasia. This article reviews 3 recent studies from our lab in which we have developed and validated several novel functional magnetic resonance imaging paradigms for language mapping in aphasia. Method: In the 1st study, we investigated the reliability and validity of 4 language mapping paradigms in neurologically normal older adults. In the 2nd study, we developed a novel adaptive semantic matching paradigm and assessed its feasibility, reliability, and validity in individuals with and without aphasia. In the 3rd study, we developed and evaluated 2 additional adaptive paradigms—rhyme judgment and syllable counting—for mapping phonological encoding regions. Results: We found that the adaptive semantic matching paradigm could be performed by most individuals with aphasia and yielded reliable and valid maps of core perisylvian language regions in each individual participant. The psychometric properties of this paradigm were superior to those of other commonly used paradigms such as narrative comprehension and picture naming. The adaptive rhyme judgment paradigm was capable of identifying fronto-parietal phonological encoding regions in individual participants. Conclusion: Adaptive language mapping paradigms offer a promising approach for future research on the neural basis of recovery from aphasia. Presentation Video: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.10257584

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1044/2019_jslhr-l-rsnp-19-0031

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 56 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Swinburn K., 2004, Comprehensive Aphasia Test (CAT)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 25

Metadata

Authors
Wilson, S. M., Eriksson, D. K., Yen, M., Demarco, A. T., Schneck, S. M., & Lucanie, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Georgetown University (US)
Venue
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
Published
2019-11-22
Volume
62
Issue
11
Pages
3937-3946
ISSN
  • 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-9102
OpenAlex
W2990994359
Cited by
25
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R21DC016080, R13DC003383, R01DC013270)
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
aphasia, language mapping, neuroplasticity, semantic matching, rhyme judgment, syllable counting, phonological encoding, aphasia recovery, psychometric validation
MeSH terms
Aphasia, Brain Mapping, Forecasting, Humans, Language, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Phonetics, Semantics, Reproducibility of Results

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