Comparing Traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (tSFA) and Semantic Feature Analysis + Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST)

Official title

Comparing the Effectiveness of Traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) Versus SFA Plus Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST) for People With Acquired Aphasia

Overview

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the effectiveness of traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) treatment to a modified SFA protocol that includes Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST) for adults with acquired aphasia. The main questions it aims to answer are: * What are the comparative outcomes in picture naming accuracy and strategy use during picture naming following 2 months of traditional SFA versus SFA + MST in adults with acquired aphasia? * What are the comparative outcomes in percent of informative content and rate of informative content during spontaneous speech production following 2 months of traditional SFA versus SFA + MST in adults with acquired aphasia? Researchers will compare outcomes between these two treatments to see if SFA+MST yields larger effects in picture naming and spontaneous speech outcomes than traditional SFA. Participants will complete: * 5-7 pre-treatment assessment sessions where they will be asked to name pictures, tell stories/describe pictures, answer questions, and complete questionnaires, * 3 treatment sessions of SFA \*OR\* SFA+MST per week for 8 weeks, for a total of 24 sessions, * 7 weekly probes (i.e., short, intermittent assessments throughout the treatment phase), * 3 post-treatment assessment sessions immediately after treatment ends, where they will complete the same assessment tasks as they did pre-treatment (e.g., naming pictures, telling stories, etc.), * 2 retention assessment sessions, one 30 days and the other 60 days following the final treatment session, where they will be asked to name pictures, tell stories/describe pictures, and describe what they learned during the study.

Interventions

• Behavioral Semantic Feature Analysis (traditional)
  This treatment involves naming pictures of objects, describing the objects' features (e.g., category membership, physical attributes, etc.), and creating sentences using the objects' names. It does not include direct metacognitive strategy training.
• Behavioral Semantic Feature Analysis + Metacognitive Strategy Training
  This treatment involves metacognitive teaching and practice, naming pictures of objects, describing the objects' features (e.g., category membership, physical attributes, etc), creating sentences using the objects' names, debriefing on overall performance, and discussing recent and future opportunities for strategy implementation in real life.

Primary outcome measures

• Confrontation naming accuracy [Time frame: Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months]
• Independent word-finding strategy use [Time frame: Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months]

Secondary outcome measures (2)

• Discourse informativeness [Time frame: Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months]
• Discourse efficiency [Time frame: Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

• Have aphasia due to a single acute event (e.g., left-hemisphere stroke, traumatic brain injury)
• Be at least six-months post aphasia-onset,
• Be a proficient English speaker,
• Have normal or corrected to normal hearing (i.e., hearing aids) and vision (i.e., eyeglasses),
• Have no history of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., dementia), severe motor speech disorder, significant mental illness, psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse, or neurological condition that could influence their cognitive, language, and memory systems

Exclusion criteria

• A history of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., dementia), severe motor speech disorder, significant mental illness, psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse, or neurological condition that could influence their cognitive, language, and memory systems,
• Children under the age of 18,
• Adults over the age of 89,
• Uncorrected hearing and vision.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Allocation

Randomized

Model

Parallel assignment

Masking

Single blind

Primary purpose

Treatment

Study locations

United States · 1 center

• Teachers College, Columbia University — New York

Publications

• Nicholas LE, Brookshire RH. A system for quantifying the informativeness and efficiency of the connected speech of adults with aphasia. J Speech Hear Res. 1993 Apr;36(2):338-50. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3602.338. PMID 8487525
• Gravier ML, Dickey MW, Hula WD, Evans WS, Owens RL, Winans-Mitrik RL, Doyle PJ. What Matters in Semantic Feature Analysis: Practice-Related Predictors of Treatment Response in Aphasia. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 Mar 1;27(1S):438-453. doi: 10.1044/2017_AJSLP-16-0196. PMID 29497754
• Tilton-Bolowsky VE, Brock L, Nunn K, Evans WS, Vallila-Rohter S. Incorporating Metacognitive Strategy Training Into Semantic Treatment Promotes Restitutive and Substitutive Gains in Naming: A Single-Subject Investigation. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2023 Sep 11;32(5):1979-2020. doi: 10.1044/2023_AJSLP-22-00230. Epub 2023 Jul 11. PMID 37433115

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07036406 · TeachersCCU

Primary sources (government registries)

• ClinicalTrials.gov (US NIH)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗