Dataset Information

RELEASE: a protocol for a systematic review based, individual participant data, meta- and network meta-analysis, of complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Speech and language therapy (SLT) benefits people with aphasia following stroke. Group level summary statistics from randomised controlled trials hinder exploration of highly complex SLT interventions and a clinically relevant heterogeneous population. Creating a database of individual participant data (IPD) for people with aphasia aims to allow exploration of individual and therapy-related predictors of recovery and prognosis.

Aim

To explore the contribution that individual participant characteristics (including stroke and aphasia profiles) and SLT intervention components make to language recovery following stroke.

Methods and procedures

We will identify eligible IPD datasets (including randomised controlled trials, non-randomised comparison studies, observational studies and registries) and invite their contribution to the database. Where possible, we will use meta- and network meta-analysis to explore language performance after stroke and predictors of recovery as it relates to participants who had no SLT, historical SLT or SLT in the primary research study. We will also examine the components of effective SLT interventions.

Outcomes and results

Outcomes include changes in measures of functional communication, overall severity of language impairment, auditory comprehension, spoken language (including naming), reading and writing from baseline. Data captured on assessment tools will be collated and transformed to a standardised measure for each of the outcome domains.

Conclusion

Our planned systematic-review-based IPD meta- and network meta-analysis is a large scale, international, multidisciplinary and methodologically complex endeavour. It will enable hypotheses to be generated and tested to optimise and inform development of interventions for people with aphasia after stroke.

Systematic review registration

The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number: CRD42018110947).

SUBMITTER: Brady MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7614912 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

RELEASE: a protocol for a systematic review based, individual participant data, meta- and network meta-analysis, of complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia.

Brady Marian C MC Ali Myzoon M VandenBerg Kathryn K Williams Linda J LJ Williams Louise R LR Abo Masahiro M Becker Frank F Bowen Audrey A Brandenburg Caitlin C Breitenstein Caterina C Bruehl Stefanie S Copland David A DA Cranfill Tamara B TB Pietro-Bachmann Marie di MD Enderby Pamela P Fillingham Joanne J Galli Federica Lucia FL Gandolfi Marialuisa M Glize Bertrand B Godecke Erin E Hawkins Neil N Hilari Katerina K Hinckley Jacqueline J Horton Simon S Howard David D Jaecks Petra P Jefferies Elizabeth E Jesus Luis M T LMT Kambanaros Maria M Kang Eun Kyoung EK Khedr Eman M EM Kong Anthony Pak-Hin AP Kukkonen Tarja T Laganaro Marina M Ralph Matthew A Lambon MAL Laska Ann Charlotte AC Leemann Béatrice B Leff Alexander P AP Lima Roxele R RR Lorenz Antje A MacWhinney Brian B Marshall Rebecca Shisler RS Mattioli Flavia F Maviş Ilknur I Meinzer Marcus M Nilipour Reza R Noé Enrique E Paik Nam-Jong NJ Palmer Rebecca R Papathanasiou Ilias I Patricio Brigida F BF Martins Isabel Pavão IP Price Cathy C Price Cathy C Jakovac Tatjana Prizl TP Rochon Elizabeth E Rose Miranda L ML Rosso Charlotte C Rubi-Fessen Ilona I Ruiter Marina B MB Snell Claerwen C Stahl Benjamin B Szaflarski Jerzy P JP Thomas Shirley A SA van de Sandt-Koenderman Mieke M van der Meulen Ineke I Visch-Brink Evy E Worrall Linda L Wright Heather Harris HH

Aphasiology 20200201 2

<h4>Background</h4>Speech and language therapy (SLT) benefits people with aphasia following stroke. Group level summary statistics from randomised controlled trials hinder exploration of highly complex SLT interventions and a clinically relevant heterogeneous population. Creating a database of individual participant data (IPD) for people with aphasia aims to allow exploration of individual and therapy-related predictors of recovery and prognosis.<h4>Aim</h4>To explore the contribution that indiv ...[more]

PMID: 37560459

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAphasia is an acquired language impairment following brain damage that affects some or all language modalities: expression and understanding of speech, reading, and writing. Approximately one third of people who have a stroke experience aphasia.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia following stroke.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 9 September 2015), CENTRAL (2015, Issue 5) and other Cochrane Library Databases (CDSR, DARE, HTA, to 22 September 2015), MEDLINE (1946 to September 2015), EMBASE (1980 to September 2015), CINAHL (1982 to September 2015), AMED (1985 to September 2015), LLBA (1973 to September 2015), and SpeechBITE (2008 to September 2015). We also searched major trials registers for ongoing trials including ClinicalTrials.gov (to 21 September 2015), the Stroke Trials Registry (to 21 September 2015), Current Controlled Trials (to 22 September 2015), and WHO ICTRP (to 22 September 2015). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we also handsearched the International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders (1969 to 2005) and reference lists of relevant articles, and we contacted academic institutions and other researchers. There were no language restrictions.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SLT (a formal intervention that aims to improve language and communication abilities, activity and participation) versus no SLT; social support or stimulation (an intervention that provides social support and communication stimulation but does not include targeted therapeutic interventions); or another SLT intervention (differing in duration, intensity, frequency, intervention methodology or theoretical approach).Data collection and analysisWe independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of included trials. We sought missing data from investigators.Main resultsWe included 57 RCTs (74 randomised comparisons) involving 3002 participants in this review (some appearing in more than one comparison). Twenty-seven randomised comparisons (1620 participants) assessed SLT versus no SLT; SLT resulted in clinically and statistically significant benefits to patients' functional communication (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.49, P = 0.01), reading, writing, and expressive language, but (based on smaller numbers) benefits were not evident at follow-up. Nine randomised comparisons (447 participants) assessed SLT with social support and stimulation; meta-analyses found no evidence of a difference in functional communication, but more participants withdrew from social support interventions than SLT. Thirty-eight randomised comparisons (1242 participants) assessed two approaches to SLT. Functional communication was significantly better in people with aphasia that received therapy at a high intensity, high dose, or over a long duration compared to those that received therapy at a lower intensity, lower dose, or over a shorter period of time. The benefits of a high intensity or a high dose of SLT were confounded by a significantly higher dropout rate in these intervention groups. Generally, trials randomised small numbers of participants across a range of characteristics (age, time since stroke, and severity profiles), interventions, and outcomes.Authors' conclusionsOur review provides evidence of the effectiveness of SLT for people with aphasia following stroke in terms of improved functional communication, reading, writing, and expressive language compared with no therapy. There is some indication that therapy at high intensity, high dose or over a longer period may be beneficial. HIgh-intensity and high dose interventions may not be acceptable to all.

Project description:Background and purposeOptimizing speech and language therapy (SLT) regimens for maximal aphasia recovery is a clinical research priority. We examined associations between SLT intensity (hours/week), dosage (total hours), frequency (days/week), duration (weeks), delivery (face to face, computer supported, individual tailoring, and home practice), content, and language outcomes for people with aphasia.MethodsDatabases including MEDLINE and Embase were searched (inception to September 2015). Published, unpublished, and emerging trials including SLT and ≥10 individual participant data on aphasia, language outcomes, and time post-onset were selected. Patient-level data on stroke, language, SLT, and trial risk of bias were independently extracted. Outcome measurement scores were standardized. A statistical inferencing, one-stage, random effects, network meta-analysis approach filtered individual participant data into an optimal model examining SLT regimen for overall language, auditory comprehension, naming, and functional communication pre-post intervention gains, adjusting for a priori-defined covariates (age, sex, time poststroke, and baseline aphasia severity), reporting estimates of mean change scores (95% CI).ResultsData from 959 individual participant data (25 trials) were included. Greatest gains in overall language and comprehension were associated with >20 to 50 hours SLT dosage (18.37 [10.58-26.16] Western Aphasia Battery-Aphasia Quotient; 5.23 [1.51-8.95] Aachen Aphasia Test-Token Test). Greatest clinical overall language, functional communication, and comprehension gains were associated with 2 to 4 and 9+ SLT hours/week. Greatest clinical gains were associated with frequent SLT for overall language, functional communication (3-5+ days/week), and comprehension (4-5 days/week). Evidence of comprehension gains was absent for SLT ≤20 hours, <3 hours/week, and ≤3 days/week. Mixed receptive-expressive therapy, functionally tailored, with prescribed home practice was associated with the greatest overall gains. Relative variance was <30%. Risk of trial bias was low to moderate; low for meta-biases.ConclusionsGreatest language recovery was associated with frequent, functionally tailored, receptive-expressive SLT, with prescribed home practice at a greater intensity and duration than reports of usual clinical services internationally. These exploratory findings suggest critical therapeutic ranges, informing hypothesis-testing trials and tailoring of clinical services. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifier: CRD42018110947.

Project description:IntroductionSeveral evidence-based treatments are effective for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), yet a substantial proportion of patients do not respond or dropout of treatment. We describe the protocol for a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) aimed at assessing the effectiveness and adverse effects of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy interventions for treating PTSD. Additionally, we seek to examine moderators and predictors of treatment outcomes.Method and analysisThis IPD-MA includes randomised controlled trials comparing psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy interventions for PTSD. PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, PTSDpubs and CENTRAL will be screened up till the 11th of January 2021. The target population is adults with above-threshold baseline PTSD symptoms on any standardised self-report measure. Trials will only be eligible if at least 70% of the study sample have been diagnosed with PTSD by means of a structured clinical interview. The primary outcomes of this IPD-MA are PTSD symptom severity, and response rate. Secondary outcomes include treatment dropout and adverse effects. Two independent reviewers will screen major bibliographic databases and past reviews. Authors will be contacted to contribute their participant-level datasets. Datasets will be merged into a master dataset. A one-stage IPD-MA will be conducted focusing on the effects of psychological and pharmacological interventions on PTSD symptom severity, response rate, treatment dropout and adverse effects. Subsequent analyses will focus on examining the effect of moderators and predictors of treatment outcomes. These will include sociodemographic, treatment-related, symptom-related, resilience, intervention, trauma and combat-related characteristics. By determining the individual factors that influence the effectiveness of specific PTSD treatments, we will gain insight into personalised treatment options for PTSD.Ethics and disseminationSpecific ethics approval for an IPD-MA is not required as this study entails secondary analysis of existing anonymised data. The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations.

Project description:Background and purposeThe factors associated with recovery of language domains after stroke remain uncertain. We described recovery of overall-language-ability, auditory comprehension, naming, and functional-communication across participants' age, sex, and aphasia chronicity in a large, multilingual, international aphasia dataset.MethodsIndividual participant data meta-analysis of systematically sourced aphasia datasets described overall-language ability using the Western Aphasia Battery Aphasia-Quotient; auditory comprehension by Aachen Aphasia Test (AAT) Token Test; naming by Boston Naming Test and functional-communication by AAT Spontaneous-Speech Communication subscale. Multivariable analyses regressed absolute score-changes from baseline across language domains onto covariates identified a priori in randomized controlled trials and all study types. Change-from-baseline scores were presented as estimates of means and 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was described using relative variance. Risk of bias was considered at dataset and meta-analysis level.ResultsAssessments at baseline (median=43.6 weeks poststroke; interquartile range [4-165.1]) and first-follow-up (median=10 weeks from baseline; interquartile range [3-26]) were available for n=943 on overall-language ability, n=1056 on auditory comprehension, n=791 on naming and n=974 on functional-communication. Younger age (<55 years, +15.4 Western Aphasia Battery Aphasia-Quotient points [CI, 10.0-20.9], +6.1 correct on AAT Token Test [CI, 3.2-8.9]; +9.3 Boston Naming Test points [CI, 4.7-13.9]; +0.8 AAT Spontaneous-Speech Communication subscale points [CI, 0.5-1.0]) and enrollment <1 month post-onset (+19.1 Western Aphasia Battery Aphasia-Quotient points [CI, 13.9-24.4]; +5.3 correct on AAT Token Test [CI, 1.7-8.8]; +11.1 Boston Naming Test points [CI, 5.7-16.5]; and +1.1 AAT Spontaneous-Speech Communication subscale point [CI, 0.7-1.4]) conferred the greatest absolute change-from-baseline across each language domain. Improvements in language scores from baseline diminished with increasing age and aphasia chronicity. Data exhibited no significant statistical heterogeneity. Risk-of-bias was low to moderate-low.ConclusionsEarlier intervention for poststroke aphasia was crucial to maximize language recovery across a range of language domains, although recovery continued to be observed to a lesser extent beyond 6 months poststroke.

Project description:BackgroundSpeech and language therapy provision for aphasia (a language disorder) post stroke has been studied over time through surveys completed by speech and language therapists. This paper revisits provision based on what was received by 278 patients in 21 UK speech and language therapy departments in 2014-2016.AimsTo explore the speech and language therapy received by community dwelling people with post stroke aphasia in the UK.Methods and proceduresA quantitative content analysis was conducted by two speech and language therapist researchers. Therapy goals recorded were coded into categories and subcategories. Descriptive statistics were used to identify the frequency with which goal categories were targeted, average therapy time received, length and frequency of therapy sessions, personnel involved and mode of delivery.Outcomes and resultsForty-five percent of participants were in receipt of therapy in the three month window observed. Six goal categories were identified. Rehabilitation was the most frequent (60%) followed by enabling (17.2%), review (4.3%), assessment (3.6%), supportive (3.5%) and activity to support therapy (2.8%). The median amount of therapy received in three months was 6.3 hours at an average of one 60-minute session every two weeks. Seventy-seven percent of therapy sessions were delivered by qualified speech and language therapists and 23% by assistants. Ninety percent of sessions were one to one, face to face sessions whilst 9.5% were group sessions.DiscussionIn line with previous reports, speech and language therapy for community dwelling stroke survivors with aphasia is restricted. Rehabilitation is a large focus of therapy but the intensity and dose with which it is provided is substantially lower than that required for an effective outcome. Despite this, one to one face to face therapy is favoured. More efficient methods to support more therapeutic doses of therapy are not commonly used in routine clinical services.

Project description:PurposeBehaviorally, acquired apraxia of speech (AOS) is a multidimensional syndrome that the experienced clinician recognizes based on impaired articulation and abnormal temporal prosody. We conducted this study to determine the extent to which three core features of AOS-when defined quantitatively-distinguish categorically among aphasia with no or minimal speech sound involvement, aphasia with AOS, and aphasia with phonemic paraphasia (APP).MethodThe study involved retrospective analysis of 195 participants with stroke-induced aphasia. We used three quantitative measures (phonemic error frequency, distortion error frequency, and word syllable duration [WSD]) to divide the sample into four participant groups according to the most likely speech diagnosis: aphasia with minimal speech sound errors, AOS, APP, and a borderline group with mixed profiles. We then conducted nonparametric comparisons across groups for which the measures were not defined and visualized all three measures in a three-dimensional graph.ResultsThe measures distributed as multidimensional spectra rather than discrete diagnostic entities, and there was considerable behavioral overlap among participant groups. Thirty percent of participants presented with aphasia with minimal sound production difficulties, and they were statistically indistinguishable from the APP group on distortion frequency and WSD. Distortion frequency and WSD were in a borderline region between AOS and APP for 29% of participants. Compared to all other groups, participants with AOS produced significantly more errors that affected listeners' phonemic perception.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the current AOS-APP dichotomy has limited validity. We conclude that a continuous multidimensional view of speech variation would be a constructive perspective from which to understand how the left cerebral hemisphere produces speech and that quantitative and normed speech measures should be used to inform differential diagnosis in clinical settings.Supplemental materialhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21807609.

Dataset Information

RELEASE: a protocol for a systematic review based, individual participant data, meta- and network meta-analysis, of complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia.

Background

Aim

Methods and procedures

Outcomes and results

Conclusion

Systematic review registration

Publications

RELEASE: a protocol for a systematic review based, individual participant data, meta- and network meta-analysis, of complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets