Investigating multilevel language interventions targeting spoken production in post-stroke aphasia: a scoping review protocol
- PMID: 40771137
- DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-24-00516
Investigating multilevel language interventions targeting spoken production in post-stroke aphasia: a scoping review protocol
Abstract
Objective: This scoping review will identify multilevel language interventions that target spoken language production in aphasia following stroke and describe their characteristics, the theoretical predictions of the approaches, and what tools are used to measure outcomes.
Introduction: Multilevel aphasia interventions target more than one linguistic level in a sequential and/or simultaneous way. Recent research has shown that treating multiple levels of language processing in the same intervention can broaden treatment effectiveness and provide greater evidence of therapy gains transferring to untreated language skills and impacting broader participation and quality of life than focusing on language levels in isolation. Currently, there is no synthesis or analysis of multilevel aphasia interventions in the literature that might help understand the components that may contribute to these potential benefits. Conducting a scoping review will allow us to systematically explore the nature of these multilevel interventions, their proposed outcomes, and highlight directions for clinical practice and future research.
Eligibility criteria: This review will consider aphasia intervention studies that aim to improve spoken production through involving more than one linguistic level in the intervention. Studies will include people with post-stroke aphasia irrespective of aphasia type, severity, or time post-onset.
Methods: This review will be conducted in accordance with JBI methodology for scoping reviews. CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus will be searched for published articles. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for relevance against the inclusion criteria. Data will be presented in tables, accompanied by a narrative summary.
Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/4y7me.
Keywords: aphasia; generalization; mechanism of change; multilevel; outcome measures.
Copyright © 2025 JBI.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
-
- Kirshner HS, Wilson SM. Aphasia and aphasic syndromes. In: Jankovich J, editor. Bradley’s neurology in clinical practice e-book. Elsevier; 2021. p.133.
-
- Dipper L, Marshall J, Boyle M, Botting N, Hersh D, Pritchard M, et al. Treatment for improving discourse in aphasia: a systematic review and synthesis of the evidence base. Aphasiology 2021;35(9):1125–67.
-
- Flowers HL, Skoretz SA, Silver FL, Rochon E, Fang J Flamand-Roze C, et al. Poststroke aphasia frequency, recovery, and outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97(12):2188–201. e8.
-
- Kladouchou V, Papathanasiou I, Efstratiadou EA, Christaki V, Hilari K. Treatment integrity of elaborated semantic feature analysis aphasia therapy delivered in individual and group settings. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2017;52(6):733–49.
-
- Carragher M, Sage K, Conroy P. Outcomes of treatment targeting syntax production in people with Broca’s‐type aphasia: evidence from psycholinguistic assessment tasks and everyday conversation. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2015;50(3):322–36.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
