C-Speak aphasia alternative communication program for people with severe aphasia: importance of executive functioning and semantic knowledge
Open accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
- 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
- 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
- ORCID
- Nicholas, Marjorie
- Venue
- Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2011-04-18
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 322-366
- ISSN
- 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0694
- PMC
- PMC3091954
- 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
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- 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