Comparing Traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (tSFA) and Semantic Feature Analysis + Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST)

Phase 2

Not yet recruiting

• Conditions: Aphasia; Aphasia Following Cerebral Infarction; Aphasia, Acquired; Aphasia, Rehabilitation; Aphasia, Anomic; Aphasia, Broca; Aphasia, Conduction; Aphasia, Expressive; Aphasia Non Fluent; Aphasia, Mixed

• Registration Number: NCT07036406
• Lead Sponsor: Teachers College, Columbia University

Brief Summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the effectiveness of traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) treatment to a modified SFA protocol that includes Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST) for adults with acquired aphasia. The main questions it aims to answer are:

* What are the comparative outcomes in picture naming accuracy and strategy use during picture naming following 2 months of traditional SFA versus SFA + MST in adults with acquired aphasia?

* What are the comparative outcomes in percent of informative content and rate of informative content during spontaneous speech production following 2 months of traditional SFA versus SFA + MST in adults with acquired aphasia?

Researchers will compare outcomes between these two treatments to see if SFA+MST yields larger effects in picture naming and spontaneous speech outcomes than traditional SFA.

Participants will complete:

* 5-7 pre-treatment assessment sessions where they will be asked to name pictures, tell stories/describe pictures, answer questions, and complete questionnaires,

* 3 treatment sessions of SFA \*OR\* SFA+MST per week for 8 weeks, for a total of 24 sessions,

* 7 weekly probes (i.e., short, intermittent assessments throughout the treatment phase),

* 3 post-treatment assessment sessions immediately after treatment ends, where they will complete the same assessment tasks as they did pre-treatment (e.g., naming pictures, telling stories, etc.),

* 2 retention assessment sessions, one 30 days and the other 60 days following the final treatment session, where they will be asked to name pictures, tell stories/describe pictures, and describe what they learned during the study.

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Status Verified: 2025-06
• Study Start: 2025-06-01
• Study First Submitted: 2025-06-09
• Study First Submitted QC: 2025-06-16
• Last Update Submitted: 2025-06-16
• Study First Posted: 2025-06-25
• Last Update Posted: 2025-06-25
• Primary Completion: 2026-12
• Study Completion: 2027-07-01

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 40

Inclusion Criteria

• Have aphasia due to a single acute event (e.g., left-hemisphere stroke, traumatic brain injury)
• Be at least six-months post aphasia-onset,
• Be a proficient English speaker,
• Have normal or corrected to normal hearing (i.e., hearing aids) and vision (i.e., eyeglasses),
• Have no history of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., dementia), severe motor speech disorder, significant mental illness, psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse, or neurological condition that could influence their cognitive, language, and memory systems

Exclusion Criteria

• A history of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., dementia), severe motor speech disorder, significant mental illness, psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse, or neurological condition that could influence their cognitive, language, and memory systems,
• Children under the age of 18,
• Adults over the age of 89,
• Uncorrected hearing and vision.

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Confrontation naming accuracy	Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months	Participants will complete a 60-item confrontation naming assessment before, during, and after treatment. We will calculate the total number of items that participants name accurately across study phases.
Independent word-finding strategy use	Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months	Using the 60-item confrontation naming assessment, we will evaluate instances in which participants independently use a specific word-finding strategy (describing or talking around the word) in instances where they cannot name items successfully, and calculate the proportions of incorrect responses with and without strategy use across study phases.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Discourse informativeness	Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months	Participants will describe picture scenes and tell stories. We will calculate the amount of informative content in their descriptions/stories using Content Information Unit (%CIU; Nicholas \& Brookshire, 1993) analysis for descriptions/stories across study phases.
Discourse efficiency	Change from Baseline through study completion, an average of 6 months	Participants will describe picture scenes and tell stories. We will calculate the rate of informative content in their descriptions/stories using Content Information Unit (CIU/minute; Nicholas \& Brookshire, 1993) analysis for descriptions/stories across study phases.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Teachers College, Columbia University; 🇺🇸 New York, New York, United States