An interventional study of Errorful training condition and Errorless training condition in Anomia, Aphasia and Traumatic Brain Injury, sponsored by Georgetown University. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-09-19.
Sponsored by Georgetown University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Adults who sustain brain damage due to stroke, traumatic injury or surgery may develop difficulty finding words. This study compares the effectiveness of two behavior-based programs to improve picture naming ability in these individuals.
Difficulty finding words is common in patients with aphasia subsequent to left hemisphere stroke. This study will compare two cognitive therapies for the treatment of acquired word finding difficulties. The therapies use different types of cues. All participants will receive both therapies. Participants in this study will undergo a comprehensive and detailed assessment of language and other cognitive skills. The two treatments will be compared for their efficacy.
47 studies on the registry are indexed under Anomia; 9 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 78 is above the median of 24 across 43 interventional studies indexed under Anomia.
Browse Anomia studies →Georgetown University is the lead sponsor of 292 studies on the registry; 40 are open to participants now.
Of its 28 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 20 (71%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
A type of anomia rehabilitation paradigm which allows for errors. The intervention involves providing minimal auditory cues to allow for errors in picture naming.
Procedure: Errorful training condition
A type of anomia rehabilitation paradigm in which the situation surrounding the performance of the desired task (i.e., picture naming) is controlled to prevent errors. The intervention involves providing maximal auditory cues to prevent errors in picture naming.
Procedure: Errorless training condition
Errorful training condition: Participant saw a picture and named it without any cues. If an error was produced, the cue with the least amount of information was provided (e.g. for "pumpkin", "pu"). Cues with increasing information were provided until the picture was correctly named (e.g. for "pumpkin": "pump", "pumpki", then "pumpkin"). Once the correct name was provided, the trial ended.
Errorless learning (EL) condition: Participant saw a picture with its name, and repeated the word. The participant continued to name the picture as the auditory cues provided less and less of the word (e.g. for "banana" she would hear "banan", "bana" then "ba" and finally no cue). If an error was produced at any stage, the whole word was presented, the participant repeated it, and the trial ended.
Improved picture naming of trained words.
Overall accuracy of named trained items
Time frame: Following conclusion of word treatment.
Improved picture naming of trained words.
Overall accuracy of named trained items
Time frame: At 6 months after conclusion of word treatment
Improved picture naming of untrained words.
Overall accuracy of named untrained items
Time frame: Following conclusion of word treatment.
Improved picture naming of untrained words.
Overall accuracy of named untrained items
Time frame: At 6 months after conclusion of word treatment
Plan to share: No
The record gives a start of Jul 2004, a primary completion of Jun 2009 and a completion of Jun 2009. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2014. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.