This trial is evaluating whether Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) will improve 1 primary outcome and 10 secondary outcomes in patients with Aphasia. Measurement will happen over the course of Through study completion, an average of 10 weeks.
This trial requires 48 total participants across 2 different treatment groups
This trial involves 2 different treatments. Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) is the primary treatment being studied. Participants will all receive the same treatment. There is no placebo group. The treatments being tested are not being studied for commercial purposes.
SFA is an alternative to conventional lexical analysis in determining semantic attributes of aphasic word in an aphasic case. The experiment performed in the present study shows that SFA may be able to distinguish between patients with Wernicke or Broca aphasias on the basis of aphasic word characteristics even despite the deficit of speech comprehension that was not corrected by the use of speech therapy.
Individuals with aphasia complain of difficulty understanding words and sentences - this can include trouble with basic syntax (words that can be formed from singular words), difficulties with word associations, and the reading of long sentences.
A definitive etiology has not been shown for most types of aphasia, though some factors contribute to both the initiation of an aphasic state and the severity of damage. Many neurological diseases can be the cause of aphasia, including brain lesions, blood flow abnormalities, metabolic problems, and drugs. Aphasia frequently occurs in the chronic stage of multiple sclerosis. Aphasia due to epilepsy or stroke is the most disabling, but it is difficult to distinguish it from a focal cortical source. Aphasic speech is usually due to a combination of factors: damage to both auditory and motor pathways, as well as to aphasia itself.
Aphasia is an impairment in linguistic ability and comprehension, caused by lesions or damage to the brain. It is one of the most common speech and language disorders. There are several subtypes of aphasia and in many cases, no cause can be ascertained.\n
Many therapies for aphasia have been tried as well as many different forms of treatments. Treatments for aphasia have changed over the years with the advent of many different approaches. Many of these approaches tend to be ineffective, or at any rate they do not produce substantial short-term progress towards normal language functioning. Many of these methods rely on behavioral therapies, speech therapy and computer assessments to track progress. There is no firm evidence base regarding specific therapy methods and the most effective and cost-effective approaches. Results from a recent paper of randomised trials of the many different approaches is limited but there is some evidence that treatments that use spoken language can be successful.
It appears that neurorehabilitation for patients with aphasia is necessary for the recovery of language. It is important to recognize that language recovery depends on both factors related to the severity of initial damage and factors related to individual patient profile.
Although the prevalence of phonemic agaaphasia is unknown, these data show that phonemic agaaphasia is found frequently in the general population and that there are no demographic differences between genders or races at presentation. Aphasia is considered a chronic progressive disabling language disorder. In a community setting, clinicians should be aware of a higher prevalence of phonemic agaaphasia (and presumably other aphasias) for all participants in language-based research protocols.
Aphasia can occur as a result of lesions (brain damage) anywhere in the brain, but the brain areas most commonly affected as a result of lesions are [the left temporal lobe and the dominant hemisphere]. Brain injuries that result in aphasia often cause both sensory and linguistic deficits. It can be difficult to determine the exact cause of aphasia unless a brain imaging study or other detailed diagnostic tests are done. Clinical trials could provide insight into a new treatment or new method of treatment. To find out which new treatments, treatments, or treatments are available for aphasia, you can find out where the recent clinical trials for aphasia are being conducted by using [Power](http://www.withpower.
Aphasiology studies reveal that aphasia type of damage can be associated with different spatial and semantic features such as the visual lexical space and aphasic visual agnosia. Clinically, however, it is often difficult to identify features of the brain that are associated with various aphasic symptoms, particularly when the brain has been damaged prior to the development of the aphasic symptoms. Researchers have therefore attempted to analyze these features in other clinical studies with greater success. Other studies that have used cognitive neuropsychological assessment to study aphasia are found to focus on lexical processing rather than feature processing such as that performed in the present study.
A large proportion of speech and language impairment patients present with aphasia as the primary diagnosis. This has social and economic implications for the individual and carers. The diagnosis needs to be made with the patient as informed as possible so that a multifactorial treatment approach can be planned. The aphasia should be attributed to the primary process rather than the aphasia to maximize the amount of recovery and return to function.
In addition to earlier models of speech perception mechanisms, a third model was proposed to take advantage of the new understanding of speech perception mechanisms. This model would enable the acquisition of speech in aphasia by taking advantage of spared abilities. The model may, thus, prove to be both therapeutically useful and useful for evaluating the theories of speech perception, particularly in treating language aphasia.
The major side effects of sfa is [neural and cognitive dysfunction, including cognitive and attention deficits and [language disturbance]], especially at low to fair [doses]. The other commonly reported side effects relate to [emotional changes], [overall worsening] and [surgical procedure] side effects. In addition to such side effects from sfa [especially for adults], children are reported to tolerate this procedure rather favorably.