Evidence Hub

Comparative Efficacy of Cognitive Training for Post-Stroke Aphasia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Kong Q, Wang J, Huang X, He J, Chang J

Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 2024

501 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although cognitive training has shown potential for treating post-stroke aphasia (PSA), its efficacy varies across studies, and the optimal training approaches remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the effects of distinct cognitive training interventions, either combined with or independent of speech and language therapy (SLT), on language function in individuals with PSA.

METHODS: A systematic search encompassing PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, VIP, and Chinese Biomedical Databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A network meta-analysis evaluated interventions, including computer-assisted cognitive training (CCT), conventional cognitive training (CT), virtual reality (VR)-based cognitive training (vrCT), telerehabilitation computer-assisted cognitive training (tCCT), working memory (WM) training, and attention training (AT).

RESULTS: Eleven RCTs comprising 501 participants were included. Individuals with PSA who underwent combined WM training with SLT led to significantly enhanced Western Aphasia Battery (WAB) Aphasia Quotient (AQ), as well as in spontaneous speech, auditory comprehension, repetition, and naming, compared to those receiving SLT alone. This combination was more effective than both CCT with SLT and tCCT with SLT in improving WAB AQ. Similarly, it outperformed both CCT with SLT and vrCT with SLT in enhancing WAB spontaneous speech. Additionally, both AT and CT…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 501 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free