ReviewBrain sciences2026
Unifying Divergent Conceptions in Nonfluent/Agrammatic and Semantic Primary Progressive Aphasia.
Review in Brain sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The nonfluent/agrammatic variant of primary progressive aphasia (nfav-PPA) and primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) are neurodegenerative syndromes that raise diagnostic challenges related to several issues. First, there are two divergent conceptions, one stipulating that (i) nfav-APP and PPAOS are distinct entities, and the other (ii) that PPAOS has to be integrated into the nfav-APP spectrum. A second related issue concerns the consideration of phonological dimensions, lying at the language interface with speech, which could potentially help overcome the nfva-PPA/PPAOS controversy. Third, there is a lack of internationally validated clinical tests assessing apraxia of speech and syntactic abilities with sufficient specificity and sensitivity. This narrative review discusses these issues taking into account clinical, neurocognitive and neurobiological dimensions. It proposes a conceptual-integrative framework conciliating competing nfav-APP/PPAOS accounts while suggesting a graded continuum with subdivisions, related to neurodegenerative expansion throughout language/speech production systems, ranging from syntactic to phonological to phonetic-articulatory impairments. A second controversy in the field of PPA arises from divergent conceptions of semantic PPA (sv-PPA), defined by primary damage to verbal semantics, and of semantic dementia (SD) characterized by multimodal semantic impairments. The current consensus criteria of PPA have deconstructed the initial SD conception by absorbing it into sv-PPA, hence leaving mixed and some non-verbal semantic phenotypes nosologically orphaned. Again, the article proposes a conceptual and integrative model, built on findings from clinical research and cognitive neuroscience, suggesting a graded continuum with subdivisions spanning from verbal to different non-verbal semantic impairments including social-semantic/behavioral phenotypes.
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.