Cited by 291Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryAcute Ischemic Stroke Management

Improvement in Aphasia Scores After Stroke Is Well Predicted by Initial Severity

Open access
Lazar, Ronald M., Minzer, Brandon, Antoniello, Daniel, Festa, Joanne R., Krakauer, John W., Marshall, Randolph S.·2010·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Most improvement from poststroke aphasia occurs within the first 3 months, but there remains unexplained variability in recovery. Recently, we reported a strong correlation between initial impairment and change scores in motor recovery at 90 days. We wanted to determine whether aphasia recovery (defined as a change from baseline to 90 days) shows a comparably strong correlation and whether the relation was similar to that in motor recovery. Methods— Twenty-one stroke patients had aphasia scores on the Western Aphasia Battery (WAB) obtained on stroke admission (WAB initial ) and at 90 days (WAB 3 mo ). The relation between actual change (Δ) scores (defined as WAB 3 mo − WAB initial ) and WAB initial was calculated in multiple-regression analysis. Results— Regression analysis demonstrated that WAB initial was highly correlated with ΔWAB ( R 2 =0.81, P <0.001) and that, in addition, the relation between WAB initial and ΔWAB was proportional, such that patients recovered 0.73 of maximal potential recovery (WAB maximum −WAB initial ). Conclusions— We show that, like motor recovery, there is a highly predictable relation between aphasia recovery and initial impairment, which is also proportional in nature. The comparability of recovery from motor and language impairment suggests that common mechanisms may govern reduction of poststroke neurologic impairment across different functional domains and that they could be the focus of therapeutic intervention.

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 · 10.1161/strokeaha.109.577338

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • The %MPR represents a percentage score of the maximum potential change allowing for direct meaningful comparison of amount of possible improvement on the WAB-R AQ for people with varied aphasia severity and accounts for ceiling effects.

    “The %MPR represents a percentage score of the maximum potential change (i.e. the endpoint score minus the baseline score) allowing for direct meaningful comparison of amount of possible improvement on the WAB-R AQ for people with varied aphasia severity. Using the %MPR also accounts for the ceiling effects of the standardized test.”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lazar, R. M., Minzer, B., Antoniello, D., Festa, J. R., Krakauer, J. W., & Marshall, R. S.
Affiliations
Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
Venue
Stroke
Published
2010-07
Volume
41
Issue
7
Pages
1485-1488
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2113082109
Cited by
291
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Stroke (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (K02-048099)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P50NS049060, U10NS086728, 1P50-NS049060)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD043249, 5R01-HD43249)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Keywords
post-stroke aphasia, aphasia recovery, Western Aphasia Battery, recovery prediction, motor recovery, language recovery
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aphasia, Female, Humans, Language Tests, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Severity of Illness Index, Databases, Factual, Treatment Outcome, Recovery of Function, Stroke, Young Adult

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