MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414613898 · doi:10.3390/bs15101339

Exploring Language Recovery Pattern in Persons with Aphasia Across Acute and Sub-Acute Stages

2025· article· en· W4414613898 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Puttanna, Nova Maria Saji, Mohammed Alharbi, Akshaya Swamy, Darshan Hosaholalu Sarvajna

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsLet's Talk Science
FundersTaibah University
KeywordsAphasiaComprehensionQuality of life (healthcare)Language impairmentPsychological interventionCorrelationLanguage development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recovery from aphasia is a complex process involving restoring language ability to a level comparable to an individual's pre-aphasia state. This recovery extends beyond linguistic functions such as improved quality of life and functional communication. Understanding language recovery in PWAs is a key area in aphasia research. Thus, the current study aimed to understand the pattern of language recovery in the acute and sub-acute stages of persons with aphasia (PWAs). A total of 11 PWAs aged between 40 and 80 were recruited. The study was conducted in two phases. In the acute stage (within one week post-stroke), participants were assessed using the Western Aphasia Battery-Kannada (WAB-K). In the sub-acute stage (between seven and fifteen days post-stroke), a similar test battery was repeated. The findings of the study showed auditory verbal comprehension scores were pronounced in the acute and sub-acute stages of recovery. Further, language quotient (LQ) scores were higher in the sub-acute stage compared to the acute stage, though these differences failed to evince statistical differences. Correlation analysis revealed strong positive correlations between LQ and spontaneous speech, repetition, and naming, with moderate correlations for auditory verbal comprehension. The study's findings highlight the importance of targeted therapeutic interventions for PWAs, emphasizing an early focus on auditory verbal comprehension to enhance overall language recovery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral SciencesSame topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207