Cited by 506Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersVoice and Speech Disorders

A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes in the treatment of aphasia

Robey, Randall R.·1998·Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Abstract

An extensive search of aphasia-treatment literature yielded 55 reports of clinical outcomes satisfying the essential criteria for inclusion in a meta-analysis. The results confirmed those of an earlier meta-analysis in demonstrating the utility of aphasia treatments, generally considered, for bringing about desirable clinical outcomes. Beyond the general case, the new findings address clinical utility in finer detail than was previously possible. Effects of treatment for aphasia are synthesized and assessed for each of four important dimensions: amount of treatment, type of treatment, severity of aphasia, and type of aphasia.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1044/jslhr.4101.172

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Robey's meta-analyses found a positive treatment effect, but they separated studies by design and aimed to identify effect sizes for different conditions.

    “Robey’s hallmark meta-analyses2,4,5 showed a positive aphasia treatment effect, but were segregated by study design and focused on identifying the effect size for different conditions (e.g., treated vs untreated recovery).”
  • Early commencement of supervised rehabilitation of people with aphasia leads to faster recovery.

    “Previous studies have indicated that the early commencement of supervised rehabilitation of PWA leads to a faster recovery [3].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robey, R. R.
Affiliations
University of Virginia (US)
Corresponding author
Robey, Randall R.
Venue
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
Published
1998-02
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
172-187
ISSN
  • 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-9102
OpenAlex
W2064602361
Cited by
506
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 24
FWCI
0.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Univerzita Karlova v Praze
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
Keywords
aphasia, aphasia rehabilitation, clinical outcomes, treatment efficacy, treatment duration, speech therapy
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aphasia, Chronic Disease, Humans, Middle Aged, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome

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