An interventional study of Criterion-learning practice in Aphasia, sponsored by Albert Einstein Healthcare Network. Enrolling by invitation at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 89 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-28.
Sponsored by Albert Einstein Healthcare Network · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Aphasia is a disorder of spoken and written language, most commonly following a stroke. It is estimated that between 2.5 and 4 million Americans are living with aphasia today. A common problem in aphasia involves difficulty retrieving known words in the course of language production and comprehension. The overarching goal of this project is to develop and test early efficacy, efficiency, and the tolerability of a lexical treatment for aphasia in multiple-session regimens that are comprised of retrieval practice, distributed practice, and training dedicated to the elicitation of correct retrievals. The aim of this work is to add to and refine the evidence base for the implementation and optimization of these elements in the treatment of production and comprehension deficits in aphasia, and make important steps towards an ultimate goal of self-administered lexical treatment grounded in retrieval practice principles (RPP) to supplement traditional speech-language therapy that is appropriate for People with Aphasia (PWA) from a broad level of severity of lexical processing deficit in naming and/or comprehension. This project cumulatively builds on prior work to develop a theory of learning for lexical processing impairment in aphasia that aims to ultimately explain why and for whom familiar lexical treatments work, and how to maximize the benefits they confer.
This study examines a retrieval practice-based naming treatment termed criterion learning. In criterion learning, each item's assigned criterion level dictates the number of times that item is correctly retrieved before it is dropped from further training within a session. Criterion learning optimally incorporates potent learning experiences, including spaced retrieval practice with emphasis on correct retrievals during training. The present study will provide critical observations for optimizing criterion learning for treating word processing deficits in people with aphasia. This study will recruit 12 community-dwelling individuals with aphasia, who will undergo comprehensive neuropsychological characterization. Subsequently, participants will engage in an experimental treatment designed to promote improvements in word retrieval deficits.
This study will examine whether making retrieval practice more effortful by increasing semantically-driven lexical competition enhances naming treatment benefit in a multiple-session naming treatment. This involves training items amidst related (e.g., for "dog," horse, cow, zebra) or unrelated items (e.g., for "dog," ambulance, pencil, rose). Each PWA will complete multiple training/test rounds--a round refers to the two training sessions separated by one or more days, and a retention test for those items. In some sessions, a desk-mounted eyetracker will be used to track eyegaze patterns as participants name pictures.
338 studies on the registry are indexed under Aphasia; 95 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 12 is below the median of 30 across 298 interventional studies indexed under Aphasia.
Browse Aphasia studies →Albert Einstein Healthcare Network is the lead sponsor of 63 studies on the registry; 6 are open to participants now.
Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 3 (50%) 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:
This is a single-arm study
Behavioral: Criterion-learning practice
The experiments will be presented on a computer. On each criterion-learning trial, a picture is presented and the participant is asked to try to produce the name for the object with or without a cue. Correct-answer feedback is provided. Criterion learning involves presenting a block of items, and on each trial, the experimenter or a voice-recognition component will code the response during the trial as correct/incorrect. When the item reaches its assigned criterion level, it is dropped from further training in a session.
Trained naming items
Confrontation naming task that involves trained items
Time frame: approximately one-week following treatment
Trained naming items pupillometry
Pupil size during naming
Time frame: approximately one-week post-treatment
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: Yes — Anonymized data and analysis code will be accessible on the Open Science Framework (OSF).
Supporting information: Analytic code
Time frame: 6 months following publication
Access criteria: Anonymized data and analysis code will be accessible on the Open Science Framework (OSF).
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.
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.
Albert Einstein Healthcare Network