Cited by 54Assistive Technology in Communication and MobilityNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismVoice and Speech Disorders

C-Speak aphasia alternative communication program for people with severe aphasia: importance of executive functioning and semantic knowledge

Open access
Nicholas, Marjorie, Sinotte, Michele P., Helm-Estabrooks, Nancy·2011·Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

Abstract

Learning how to use a computer-based communication system can be challenging for people with severe aphasia even if the system is not word-based. This study explored cognitive and linguistic factors relative to how they affected individual patients' ability to communicate expressively using C-Speak Aphasia (CSA), an alternative communication computer program that is primarily picture-based. Ten individuals with severe non-fluent aphasia received at least six months of training with CSA. To assess carryover of training, untrained functional communication tasks (i.e., answering autobiographical questions, describing pictures, making telephone calls, describing a short video, and two writing tasks) were repeatedly probed in two conditions: (1) using CSA in addition to natural forms of communication, and (2) using only natural forms of communication, e.g., speaking, writing, gesturing, drawing. Four of the 10 participants communicated more information on selected probe tasks using CSA than they did without the computer. Response to treatment was also examined in relation to baseline measures of non-linguistic executive function skills, pictorial semantic abilities, and auditory comprehension. Only nonlinguistic executive function skills were significantly correlated with treatment response.

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 · 10.1080/09602011.2011.559051

Cites

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?

  • Evidence from picture-based, computer-supported programs for global aphasia shows that several individuals convey more information with aided communication than with natural communication alone.

    “Evidence from picture-based, computer-supported programs for global aphasia shows that several individuals convey more information with aided communication than with natural communication alone, underscoring the practical value of such supports (19).”

    From Case Report: Tailored automatic speech recognition in global aphasia with dysarthria - a single case proof of concept (2026) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results (Generalization of Skills to the Functional Communication Probe Tasks; page unavailable) report that four participants conveyed significantly more information using C-Speak Aphasia than without it. But the Methods (Participants; page unavailable) describe a mixed group whose diagnoses ranged from global to mixed non-fluent to severe Broca’s aphasia. The cited result is therefore supported for people with severe non-fluent aphasia, not specifically for several people with global aphasia. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 39 · Cited by 54

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. McKelvey ML Dietz AR Hux K Weissling K Beukelman DR 2007 Performance of a person with chronic aphasia using personal and contextual pictures in a visual scene display prototype Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 15 3 305 317
  2. Nicholas ML 1999 Category selection in patients with nonfluent aphasia: Implications for use of a picture-based alternative communication system Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 59 7-B 3392

Authors
Nicholas, M., Sinotte, M. P., & Helm-Estabrooks, N.
Affiliations
  • MGH Institute of Health Professions (US)
  • University of Connecticut (US)
  • Western Carolina University
Corresponding author
Nicholas, Marjorie
Venue
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
Published
2011-04-18
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
322-366
ISSN
  • 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0694
OpenAlex
W2045457938
Cited by
54
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
13.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychological Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • Southern Connecticut State University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • MGH Institute of Health Professions
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R21DC05371-03, R21DC005371)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
Keywords
augmentative and alternative communication, executive function, semantic knowledge, treatment response, auditory comprehension, expressive communication
MeSH terms
Adult, Aphasia, Communication, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychomotor Performance, Semantics, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Treatment Outcome, Executive Function

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