ReviewPsychologica Belgica2025
Disorders of Consciousness, Language and Communication Following Severe Brain Injury.
Review in Psychologica Belgica, 2025. 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.
- [Application and perspective of novel auditory intervention paradigms based on verbal and nonverbal stimuli for severe traumatic brain injury].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026Review
- Prospective validation protocol for artificial intelligence-assisted standardization of Coma Recovery Scale-Revised scores using electroencephalography and clinical data in disorders of consciousness.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
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
Patients with severe brain injuries and disorders of consciousness (DoC) represent a complex clinical population in terms of diagnosis, prognosis, and management, including critical ethical considerations. Behavioral assessment scales remain the primary tools for evaluating the level of consciousness of these patients following a coma; however, they heavily depend on language and communication abilities. This reliance can lead to underestimating residual consciousness in cases where language impairments go undetected. Accordingly, the latest international guidelines on DoC diagnosis have highlighted aphasia as a significant confounding factor that must be addressed. On the other hand, accurately assessing residual language abilities is essential for better characterizing the patient's cognitive profile. This, in turn, enables neuropsychologists and speech-language therapists to tailor and plan effective rehabilitation programs. This review examines the current literature on language function and communication skills in patients with DoC, detailing the latest tools for assessing and managing language and consciousness in individuals with severe brain injuries. We explore the critical role of language function in evaluating residual consciousness, particularly in DoC behavioral diagnoses and in identifying covert consciousness through neuroimaging passive or active paradigms. Furthermore, we discuss how therapies aimed at recovering consciousness-such as pharmacological treatments, electromagnetic therapies, sensory or cognitive stimulation, and communication aids like brain-computer interfaces-may also impact or rely on language function and communication abilities. Further research is needed to refine methodologies and better understand the interplay between language processing, communication and levels of consciousness.
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.