Trial reportScientific reports2025
ORLA combined with telerehabilitation in patients with subacute Poststroke aphasia: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Narrative Review on Post-Stroke Outcomes Through Recognition of Frailty, Sarcopenia, and Palliative Care Needs.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oral reading for language in aphasia (ORLA) therapy coupled with telerehabilitation (TR) is a promising adjunct to treatment for aphasia. This single-center, randomized, single-blind, 6-month trial aimed to evaluate whether ORLA combined with TR demonstrates comparable efficacy to conventional ORLA offline rehabilitation for improving comprehensive language ability in subacute aphasia patients while assessing longitudinal treatment effects. Enrolled patients were randomized 1:1:1 into Group A (medium-high intensity ORLA TR), Group B (low-intensity ORLA TR), and Group C (medium-high intensity ORLA offline). All groups received a 6-month, 90-h intervention comprising three treatment phases. The primary outcome was a change in Aphasia Quotient (AQ) at baseline and 4 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months post-treatment. The secondary outcomes included quality of life and language subscale scores at the same time points. A total of 42 participants were analyzed, Group A demonstrated a non-significant mean difference of - 0.62 (95% CI - 5.00 to 6.23; P = 0.825) in AQ compared to Group C. A statistically significant difference in the Stroke Aphasia Quality of Life-39 Scale (SAQOL-39) scores between Group A and Group C (mean difference: - 8.19; 95% CI [- 12.39, - 3.99]; P < 0.001). Group A vs. Group C: No statistically significant differences were observed in any of the aforementioned language subskills between Group A and Group C (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). ORLA combined with TR demonstrated comparable efficacy to conventional ORLA offline rehabilitation, serving as a viable alternative for home-based speech rehabilitation in subacute aphasia patients. This TR approach improved both comprehensive language ability and quality of life, with sustained treatment effects over time.First registration date: August 18, 2023 (retrospective registration, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry number: ChiCTR2300074870).
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.