↓ Skip to main content

Predicting speech fluency and naming abilities in aphasic patients

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting speech fluency and naming abilities in aphasic patients
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00831
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jasmine Wang, Sarah Marchina, Andrea C. Norton, Catherine Y. Wan, Gottfried Schlaug

Abstract

There is a need to identify biomarkers that predict degree of chronic speech fluency/language impairment and potential for improvement after stroke. We previously showed that the Arcuate Fasciculus lesion load (AF-LL), a combined variable of lesion site and size, predicted speech fluency in patients with chronic aphasia. In the current study, we compared lesion loads of such a structural map (i.e., AF-LL) with those of a functional map [i.e., the functional gray matter lesion load (fGM-LL)] in their ability to predict speech fluency and naming performance in a large group of patients. The fGM map was constructed from functional brain images acquired during an overt speaking task in a group of healthy elderly controls. The AF map was reconstructed from high-resolution diffusion tensor images also from a group of healthy elderly controls. In addition to these two canonical maps, a combined AF-fGM map was derived from summing fGM and AF maps. Each canonical map was overlaid with individual lesion masks of 50 chronic aphasic patients with varying degrees of impairment in speech production and fluency to calculate a functional and structural lesion load value for each patient, and to regress these values with measures of speech fluency and naming. We found that both AF-LL and fGM-LL independently predicted speech fluency and naming ability; however, AF lesion load explained most of the variance for both measures. The combined AF-fGM lesion load did not have a higher predictability than either AF-LL or fGM-LL alone. Clustering and classification methods confirmed that AF lesion load was best at stratifying patients into severe and non-severe outcome groups with 96% accuracy for speech fluency and 90% accuracy for naming. An AF-LL of greater than 4 cc was the critical threshold that determined poor fluency and naming outcomes, and constitutes the severe outcome group. Thus, surrogate markers of impairments have the potential to predict outcomes and can be used as a stratifier in experimental studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Student > Master 13 13%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Professor 7 7%
Other 23 23%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 18%
Neuroscience 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 14%
Linguistics 7 7%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 27 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2014.
All research outputs
#16,620,280
of 24,527,858 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,400
of 7,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,003
of 290,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#674
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,527,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 290,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.