An interventional study of Active Comparator: Experimental: Active cathodal tDCS + language training and Sham Comparator: Placebo cathodal tDCS + Speech and language in Stroke and Aphasia, sponsored by University of New Mexico. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 25 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-05-22.
Sponsored by University of New Mexico · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
62 patients who are one year post stroke and have Aphasia as a result of that stroke will be recruited. Participants will have 4 assessment sessions and 15 treatment sessions. The TDCS will be to right Inferior Frontal Gyrus (IFG) (25 active, 25 sham) for 15 days. A combined semantic feature analysis/phonological components analysis treatment will be paired with the stimulation. Two assessment sessions will be pretreatment, 1 session immediately post-treatment, and 1 session at 3 months follow-up.
Our long-term goal is to develop safe and effective treatments for the communication problems of Aphasia due to stroke that restore patients to higher levels of functioning, decrease disability, and promote higher quality of life. While language therapy for aphasia is effective, improvements are typically slow, and gains may be small. Noninvasive brain stimulation has been suggested as a method to enhance outcomes from language therapy. This study will examine whether outcomes for language therapy with brain stimulation are different from outcomes for language therapy without brain stimulation in people with aphasia. Our central hypotheses are (1) targeted right hemisphere HDtDCS (RH-HD-tDCS) administered in combination with language treatment will result in greater changes in naming accuracy than language treatment with the sham RH-HD-tDCS (2) RH-HD-tDCS plus language treatment will result in greater increases in communication within the affected hemisphere compared to language treatment plus sham RH-HD-tDCS (3) RH-HD-tDCS plus language treatment will result in greater increases in perilesional areas working together immediately post-treatment compared to language treatment plus sham RH-HD-tDCS
8,255 studies on the registry are indexed under Stroke; 2,056 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 50 is close to the median of 49 across 6,024 interventional studies indexed under Stroke.
Browse Stroke studies →University of New Mexico is the lead sponsor of 313 studies on the registry; 29 are open to participants now.
Of its 25 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 23 (92%) 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:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Contraindication
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
In this arm, 31 patients with stroke induced Aphasia will undergo 15 sessions of active tDCS (x 30 minutes of stimulation) combined with 1 hour simultaneous speech-language training on consecutive weekdays.
Device: Active Comparator: Experimental: Active cathodal tDCS + language training
In this arm, 31 patients with stroke induced Aphasia will undergo 15 sessions of sham tDCS (x 30 minutes sham) combined with 1 hour simultaneous speech-language training on consecutive weekdays..
Behavioral: Sham Comparator: Placebo cathodal tDCS + Speech and language
Cathodal tDCS raises neuronal membrane potentials, leading to decreased probability of depolarization from incoming stimuli. Speech and Language training involves a combined semantic feature analysis and phonological components analysis treatment.
Also known as: Behavioral: Speech and Language Training
Speech and Language training involves a combined semantic feature analysis and phonological components analysis treatment. .
Picture Naming of trained items
Change in naming of pictures of trained items; 60 pictured items; higher score indicates improvement
Time frame: 3 months
Naming Response Time of trained items Scales - IV (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, Coalson, & Railford, 2008)
Change in response time of naming of pictures of trained items; 0-20 seconds, decreased response time indicates improvement Scales - IV (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, Coalson, \& Railford, 2008)
Time frame: 3 months
Naming Efficiency of trained items
Change in efficiency of naming of pictures of trained items; median response time divided by proportion correct naming; smaller numbers indicate greater efficiency
Time frame: 3 months
Discourse informativeness - Main Concept Production
Change in discourse informativeness as measured by main concept scores; increased values indicate improvement
Time frame: 3 months
Efficiency of discourse informativeness - Main Concept Production
Change in efficiency of discourse informativeness; accurate and complete main concepts produced over the time of discourse elicitation (ACs/min); larger numbers indicate greater efficiency
Time frame: 3 months
Picture Naming of untrained items - Boston Naming Test
Change in naming of pictures of untrained items; 60 pictured items; higher score indicates improvement
Time frame: 3 months
Naming Response Time of untrained items - Boston Naming Test
Change in response time of naming of pictures of untrained items; 0-20 seconds, decreased response time indicates improvement
Time frame: 3 months
Naming Efficiency of untrained items - Boston Naming Test
Change in efficiency of naming of pictures of untrained items; median response time divided by proportion correct naming; smaller numbers indicate greater efficiency
Time frame: 3 months
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Started Oct 2022 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Mar 2027, 53 months after the start.
Of 3,108 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Stroke, half reached primary completion within 23 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 46. This study's planned 53 months is above that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 3,252 studies reached it within 23 months; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 46.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet 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.