Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Aphasia
Recruiting in Palo Alto (17 mi)
Age: 18+
Sex: Any
Travel: May Be Covered
Time Reimbursement: Varies
Trial Phase: Academic
Recruiting
Sponsor: VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System
Disqualifiers: Right hemisphere stroke, Neurological disease, Psychiatric disorder, others
No Placebo Group
Approved in 1 Jurisdiction
Trial Summary
What is the purpose of this trial?This randomized controlled comparative effectiveness study examines manipulation of a key component of an established and efficacious treatment for naming impairments in aphasia, along with cognitive and brain correlates of treatment success. Study participants will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment conditions comparing two different versions of Semantic Feature Analysis treatment. Their performance on standardized and study-specific measures will be used to determine which version of the treatment provides superior outcomes, and measures of automatic language processing and functional brain imaging will also be used to identify the underlying neurocognitive mechanisms associated with positive treatment response.
Will I have to stop taking my current medications?
The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications. However, it does require that you do not participate in any other speech-language treatment during the study.
What data supports the effectiveness of the Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Aphasia?
Research shows that Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) treatment helps people with aphasia improve their ability to name objects, both for words they practice and some related words they don't practice. Studies also suggest that the more features patients generate during treatment, the better their naming skills improve, especially for the words they directly work on.
12345Is Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Aphasia safe for humans?
The research articles reviewed do not provide specific safety data for Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Aphasia, but they focus on its effectiveness in improving naming abilities in individuals with aphasia. There are no reported safety concerns in the studies, suggesting it is generally considered safe for use in humans.
12367What makes Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment unique for aphasia?
Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment is unique because it focuses on improving word retrieval by having patients generate and analyze semantic features (characteristics and meanings) of words, which can enhance naming abilities for both treated and related untreated words. This approach is different from other treatments as it emphasizes patient involvement in generating features and can be modified to include fewer features or combined with other strategies like working memory tasks to improve outcomes.
12348Eligibility Criteria
This trial is for individuals who have aphasia due to a stroke in the left side of their brain, at least 6 months ago. They must be able to manage daily activities on their own or with help from a caregiver, and not have uncontrolled health issues like seizures. Participants should speak English as their first language and not be involved in other speech treatments during the study.Inclusion Criteria
Sufficient auditory comprehension abilities demonstrated during screening
I am not participating in any other speech therapy during this study.
It's been 6 months since my stroke, which caused speech issues.
+4 more
Exclusion Criteria
You have a serious mental health condition.
You are currently dependent on drugs or alcohol.
You have a serious problem with speaking or moving.
+2 more
Trial Timeline
Screening
Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial
1-2 weeks
Treatment
Participants receive 60 hours of Semantic Feature Analysis treatment over a five-week period
5 weeks
Daily sessions
Follow-up
Participants are monitored for safety and effectiveness after treatment, including language, eye-tracking, and fMRI testing
8 to 12 weeks post intervention
2 visits (in-person)
Participant Groups
The study tests two versions of Semantic Feature Analysis treatment for naming impairments caused by aphasia. It's a randomized controlled trial where participants are assigned randomly to one of the two treatment groups to see which is more effective.
2Treatment groups
Experimental Treatment
Active Control
Group I: SFA Experimental InterventionExperimental Treatment1 Intervention
A modified version of Semantic Feature Analysis will be administered.
Group II: SFA Active Comparator InterventionActive Control1 Intervention
A standard version of Semantic Feature Analysis will be administered.
Find a Clinic Near You
Research Locations NearbySelect from list below to view details:
VA Pittsburgh Healthcare SystemPittsburgh, PA
Loading ...
Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?
VA Pittsburgh Healthcare SystemLead Sponsor
Penn State UniversityCollaborator
References
A Systematic Review of Semantic Feature Analysis Therapy Studies for Aphasia. [2019]The purpose of this study was to review treatment studies of semantic feature analysis (SFA) for persons with aphasia. The review documents how SFA is used, appraises the quality of the included studies, and evaluates the efficacy of SFA.
Effects of Semantic Feature Type, Diversity, and Quantity on Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment Outcomes in Aphasia. [2021]Purpose Semantic feature analysis (SFA) is a naming treatment found to improve naming performance for both treated and semantically related untreated words in aphasia. A crucial treatment component is the requirement that patients generate semantic features of treated items. This article examined the role feature generation plays in treatment response to SFA in several ways: It attempted to replicate preliminary findings from Gravier et al. (2018), which found feature generation predicted treatment-related gains for both trained and untrained words. It examined whether feature diversity or the number of features generated in specific categories differentially affected SFA treatment outcomes. Method SFA was administered to 44 participants with chronic aphasia daily for 4 weeks. Treatment was administered to multiple lists sequentially in a multiple-baseline design. Participant-generated features were captured during treatment and coded in terms of feature category, total average number of features generated per trial, and total number of unique features generated per item. Item-level naming accuracy was analyzed using logistic mixed-effects regression models. Results Producing more participant-generated features was found to improve treatment response for trained but not untrained items in SFA, in contrast to Gravier et al. (2018). There was no effect of participant-generated feature diversity or any differential effect of feature category on SFA treatment outcomes. Conclusions Patient-generated features remain a key predictor of direct training effects and overall treatment response in SFA. Aphasia severity was also a significant predictor of treatment outcomes. Future work should focus on identifying potential nonresponders to therapy and explore treatment modifications to improve treatment outcomes for these individuals. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12462596.
The use of a modified semantic features analysis approach in aphasia. [2022]Several studies have reported improved naming using the semantic feature analysis (SFA) approach in individuals with aphasia. Whether the SFA can be modified and still produce naming improvements in aphasia is unknown. The present study was designed to address this question by using a modified version of the SFA approach. Three, rather than the typical six, features were used, and written along with verbal responses were allowed in an individual with both aphasia and apraxia of speech. A single-subject multiple-baseline design across behaviors was used to treat naming of single objects across three different semantic categories in a 72-year-old individual with aphasia and apraxia of speech. Stimulus generalization of training was measured by using photographs of trained items presented in natural contexts. Training of the three different categories resulted in improved naming. At a 6-week follow-up session, naming remained above pre-treatment levels but declines were noted compared to treatment levels. Generalization to the same trained items presented in different contexts was also demonstrated although declines in performance were also noted over time. Results of the study provide qualified support for the use of three features in promoting long-term improvement of naming in an individual with both aphasia and apraxia of speech. Future SFA studies should focus on whether it is the number or types of features used, aphasia severity, or length of treatment that are critical factors in rehabilitating naming deficits in aphasia.
Incorporating Metacognitive Strategy Training Into Semantic Treatment Promotes Restitutive and Substitutive Gains in Naming: A Single-Subject Investigation. [2023]This study tested the effectiveness of a modified semantic feature analysis (SFA) treatment protocol that incorporated metacognitive strategy training (MST). Regarding its restitutive component, SFA most reliably results in improved word retrieval for treated items and untreated, semantically related items, but evidence of response generalization is often small/inconsistent. Regarding its substitutive component, SFA is thought to facilitate successful communication via habituation of the SFA circumlocution strategy. However, repeated practice with SFA's strategy in the absence of direct MST may not result in independent strategy use and/or generalization. Furthermore, people with aphasia's independent use of the SFA strategy in moments of anomia is presently underreported. To address these limitations, we incorporated MST into SFA and directly measured substitutive outcomes.
Acquisition and Generalization Responses in Aphasia Naming Treatment: A Meta-Analysis of Semantic Feature Analysis Outcomes. [2020]Purpose This meta-analysis synthesizes results from published studies that used semantic feature analysis (SFA) treatment to improve naming for people with aphasia. It examines how both person- and treatment-related variables affected the likelihood of correct naming responses in individual probe sessions for both acquisition (treated) and generalization (untreated) stimuli. Method The meta-analysis compiled data from 12 studies analyzing a total of 35 participants with aphasia. It used mixed-effects models as a novel statistical tool to examine the effects of 2 sets of variables on naming performance: treatment-related variables, including treatment phase (baseline vs. treatment), dosage (number of treatment sessions), and stimulus type (treated vs. untreated, semantically related vs. unrelated items), and person-specific variables, including degree of language impairment and demographic variables (age, time poststroke). Results Results of the meta-analysis revealed that SFA intervention promoted increased naming accuracy during naming probes when comparing baseline and treatment phases. In addition, increased dosages of SFA were associated with increased naming accuracy, and treatment-related gains were larger for acquisition (treated) than generalization (untreated) stimuli, likewise for related versus unrelated generalization stimuli. Furthermore, a subset of person-specific variables was predictive of SFA-related gains: Language impairment variables were related to treatment-related changes in naming performance, but demographic variables were not. Conclusion These results provide group-level evidence for the efficacy of SFA as well as preliminary estimates of how much naming performance benefit is engendered by varying dosages of SFA. The results also provide promising and previously unobserved evidence of potential person-level predictors of SFA treatment response.
Semantic Feature Analysis: Further Examination of Outcomes. [2019]The purpose of this investigation was to systematically examine outcomes associated with Semantic feature analysis, which is an established treatment for word-retrieval deficits in aphasia. Attributes of the experimental design and stimuli were manipulated to evaluate generalized naming of semantically related and unrelated items. In addition, the study was designed to examine changes in production of semantic information.
The role of commonality, distinctiveness and importance of semantic features in persons with aphasia. [2014]Semantic feature approaches are frequently included in treatment for people with aphasia. The present study investigated the role of distinctiveness and importance in the semantic feature knowledge of people with aphasia. The relationships between feature knowledge and the ability to choose among semantically-related foils, comprehension and naming abilities were examined.
Using a combined working memory - Semantic feature analysis approach to treat anomia in aphasia: A Pilot Study. [2023]The purpose of the study was to pilot a working memory (WM) - and modified Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) approach to treat word finding deficits in a group of people with aphasia (PwA). Two research questions were posed: 1. Will the group of PwA be able to complete the WM tasks used in the approach? 2. Will the approach improve naming performance in PwA?