An interventional study of Multimodality information comprehension in Aphasia, sponsored by Miami University. Completed at 2 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 19 Years to 90 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-10-06.
Sponsored by Miami University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care
Among 175 studies in Aphasia with a site in United States — 50 open to participants now, 60 under way, 1 of them phase 3. Aphasia · United States.
Among the 175 studies in Aphasia with a site in United States, this one is the 8th largest by enrollment of the 158 interventional ones that give a count, is one of 15 that started in 2018, is one of 130 with no phase, and was the 67th registered.
338 studies on the registry are indexed under Aphasia; 94 are open to participants now.
Browse Aphasia studies →50 of the 175 studies in Aphasia with a site in United States are open now. Recruiting first, the newest first:
Boston University Charles River Campus · Sites in United States
Ages 18–80
University of South Carolina · Sites in United States
Ages 25–80
University of South Carolina · Sites in United States
Ages 18+
Casa Colina Hospital and Centers for Healthcare · Sites in United States
Ages 18+
Maya Henry · Sites in United States
Ages 40+
A study can be open while its sites in United States have not opened yet or have stopped. Only those recruiting at a site in United States →
Of the 67 Aphasia studies recruiting now, 30 (45%) set no upper age limit and 11 (16%) stop at 75 or younger; 1 takes children under 18; 16 take healthy volunteers.
This study: 19 Years to 90 Years · all sexes · no healthy volunteers.
The full table on the hub →This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
175 studies; the count open now beside each. This study's row is marked.
A study in two phases is counted once above. Listed by phase, each with its combined phases: Phase 1 9 · Phase 2 19 · Phase 3 3 · Phase 4 1
First in 1992; this study’s year is marked. 15 started in 2018.
By drug class, each counting the studies that test any of its medicines:
This study's enrollment of 152 is above the median of 30 across 298 interventional studies indexed under Aphasia.
Median enrollment 30 across the 158 interventional studies, 62 across the 17 observational. Of the 102 that completed or were terminated, 46 (45%) have results posted.
This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
3 of 175 have an industry lead sponsor. The 10 most frequent:
Miami University is the lead sponsor of 12 studies on the registry; 3 are open to participants now.
Miami University has 2 studies filed under Aphasia — fewer than ten, so there is no comparison to draw.
20 of the studies in Aphasia with a site in United States that are under way reach primary completion within a year, 0 of them phase 3. Phase 3 first, then by date:
| Study | Primary completion |
|---|---|
| NCT07036406Teachers College, Columbia UniversityComparing Traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (tSFA) and Semantic Feature Analysis + Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST) | 2026-12 |
| NCT06829420University of South FloridaMirror Speech Entrainment: A Novel Technique for Voice Personalized Speech Entrainment for Nonfluent Aphasia | 2026-12-31 |
| NCT04142866City University of New YorkTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) With Verb Network Strengthening Treatment (VNeST) in Chronic Aphasia | 2026-12-31 |
| NCT04682223University of South CarolinaTelerehabilitation for Aphasia (TERRA) | 2027-01 |
| NCT07563387University of FloridataVNS for Speech and Language Recovery in Aphasia | 2027-01-01 |
Add all 20 to your calendar (.ics) → With an account.
Among the 175 studies in Aphasia with a site in United States, from their registry updates:
This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
People with aphasia often understand spoken utterances better than written sentences. They also benefit from having content appear in multiple rather than single modalities. Because text-to-speech (TTS) systems accommodate both of these functions, it provides an ideal basis for a reading intervention. TTS systems convert written text to provide both text and auditory information. Research about using TTS supports with people with aphasia has not extended beyond basic case studies and our studies of sentence level comprehension. Hence, no evidence exists about varying TTS features-such as speech output, speech rate, and text highlighting-known to benefit others with reading problems. Also, social acceptance of TTS is not well understood, even though it is critical to adoption and long-term use of the technology.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate various aspects of multimodality presentation of material through TTS systems used by people with aphasia. The immediate outcome of the proposed research will be evidence-based recommendations for selecting and adjusting TTS systems and features. This work will enable clinicians to maximize benefits for adults with varying aphasia profiles. We also will obtain initial evidence about the social validity and perceived value of TTS system use for this population.
Experimental Procedures
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:
Evaluate various aspects of multimodality presentation of materials through text-to-speech systems used by people with aphasia.
Behavioral: Multimodality information comprehension
Evaluate various aspects of multimodality presentation of materials through text-to-speech systems used by people with aphasia.
1. What is the accuracy with which people with aphasia comprehend paragraph-level information presented as single modalities (auditory or written) versus multiple modalities (written and auditory)?
Participants will answer questions after listening and/or reading stories
Time frame: 4 sessions, 9 minutes each over the course of 1 month
Which text-to-speech systems feature variations do people with aphasia prefer and derive the most benefit in terms of comprehension accuracy?
Read stories, answer multiple choice questions. Identify feature preferences.
Time frame: Up to 5 sessions, 90 minutes each over the course of 1 month
3. How do people with aphasia perceive and behave when using currently available text-to-speech systems?
Participants will learn about text-to-speech systems and complete interview about preferences
Time frame: 1 session lasting up to 2 hours
Plan to share: No — We will not be sharing the data because of possible breach of privacy given the small number of local people with aphasia.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from May 2018 to primary completion in Jun 2022, 49 months.
Of 183 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Aphasia, half reached primary completion within 36 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 19 and three quarters within 57. This study's 49 months is above that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 185 studies reached it within 36 months; a quarter within 19 and three quarters within 57.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2022. 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.
Miami University