ArticlePloS one2024
Exploring the association between social determinants and aphasia impairment: A retrospective data integration approach.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Linguistic Correlates of Functional Communication Abilities After Stroke: A Longitudinal Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Healthcare Access, Satisfaction, and Affordability: Experiences and Barriers of People with Aphasia.Aphasiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTraditionally, the study of aphasia focused on brain trauma, clinical biomarkers, and cognitive processes, rarely considering the social determinants of health. This study evaluates the relationship between aphasia impairment and demographic, socioeconomic, and contextual determinants among people with aphasia (PWA).
methodsPWA indexed within AphasiaBank-a database populated by multiple clinical aphasiology centers with standardized protocols characterizing language, neuropsychological functioning, and demographic information-were matched with respondents in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey based on response year, age, sex, race, ethnicity, time post stroke, and mental health status. Generalized log-linear regression models with bootstrapped standard errors evaluated the association between scores on the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised Aphasia Quotient (WAB-R AQ) and demographic, economic, and contextual characteristics accounting for clustering of respondents and the stratification of data collection. Region, age, and income specific models tested the sensitivity of results.
resultsPWA over age 60 had 2.4% (SE = 0.020) lower WAB-R AQ scores compared with younger PWA. Compared to White PWA, Black and Hispanic PWA had 4.7% (SE = 0.03) and 0.81% (SE = 0.06) lower WAB-R AQ scores, respectively, as did those and living in the Southern US (-2.2%, SE = 0.03) even after controlling for age, family size, and aphasia type. Those living in larger families (β = 0.005, SE = 0.008), with income over $30,000 (β = 0.017, SE = 0.022), and a college degree (β = 0.030, SE = 0.035) had higher WAB-R AQ relative to their counterparts. Region-specific models showed that racial differences were only significant in the South and Midwest, while ethnic differences are only significant in the West. Sex differences only appeared in age-specific models. Racial and ethnic differences were not significant in the high-income group regression.
conclusionThese findings support evidence that circumstances in which individuals live, work, and age are significantly associated with their health outcomes including aphasia impairment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.