Cited by 39Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

A comparison of drill- and communication-based treatment for aphasia

Open access
Kempler, Daniel, Goral, Mira·2011·Aphasiology

Abstract

Background: Traditional aphasia therapy is based primarily on repetition and drill. Recent treatment studies have suggested that communication-based interactions may be at least as effective if not more so in achieving positive outcomes. Aims: This study was undertaken to directly compare the outcomes of drill-based vs. communication-based interactions in modified Constraint-Induced Aphasia Therapy. Methods & Procedures: Two women with chronic non-fluent aphasia participated sequentially in two distinct treatment protocols designed to improve verb production in sentences. Both treatment protocols were provided in an intensive schedule, 30 hours over four weeks each. The treatments contrasted drill-based vs. communication-based interactions between the client and the clinician. Outcome measures included verb naming and production of personal narratives. Outcomes & Results: Drill-based but not communication-based treatment had a small positive effect on participants' verb naming accuracy. The communication-based protocol, but not the drill-based treatment, had a pronounced positive effect on participants' sentence and narrative structure. Conclusions: The results suggest that communication-based interactions are more effective than drill in improving narrative production in aphasia. We suggest that this type of communication-based constraint-induced therapy works to reduce learned non-use patterns of language production and can be structured to improve production of verbs in sentences. The success of this approach can be attributed to the fact communication-based therapy, like typical verbal interactions, emphasises exchange of novel information and allows individuals with aphasia to capitalise on their preserved discourse knowledge.

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 · 10.1080/02687038.2011.599364

Cites

40 of 40 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?

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: 1

  1. Simmons-Mackie N Chapey R 2008 Social approaches to aphasia intervention Language Intervention Strategies in Aphasia and Related Neurogenic Communication Disorders 290 318 NY Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kempler, D., & Goral, M.
Affiliations
  • Emerson College (US)
  • Lehman College (US)
Corresponding author
Kempler, Daniel
Venue
Aphasiology
Published
2011-09-30
Volume
25
Issue
11
Pages
1327-1346
ISSN
  • 0268-7038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5041
OpenAlex
W1965621278
Cited by
39
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Aphasiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (SC1DC009792)
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
aphasia rehabilitation, non-fluent aphasia, verb production, narrative production, verb naming, discourse knowledge, learned nonuse

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