Semantic Feature Analysis with versus without Metacognitive Strategy Training for adults with aphasia

Comparing the Effectiveness of Traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) Versus SFA Plus Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST) for People With Acquired Aphasia

This trial will test whether adding metacognitive strategy training to semantic feature analysis helps adults with acquired aphasia name pictures more accurately and speak with more informative content.

Quick facts

• Phase: PHASE2
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 40 (estimated)
• Ages: 18 Years to 89 Years
• Sex: All
• Sponsor: Teachers College, Columbia University (other)
• Locations: 1 site (New York, New York)
• Trial ID: NCT07036406 on ClinicalTrials.gov

What this trial studies

This Phase 2 interventional trial compares two two-month therapy protocols—traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) and SFA combined with Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST)—in adults with chronic acquired aphasia. Participants complete 5–7 pre-treatment assessment sessions of picture naming and spontaneous speech tasks, then receive one of the two treatments. Primary outcomes are picture naming accuracy, use of naming strategies during picture naming, percent of informative content, and rate of informative content during spontaneous speech. Investigators will compare group-level changes to determine whether adding metacognitive training yields larger effects and better generalization to everyday communication.

Who should consider this trial

Good fit: Ideal candidates are English-speaking adults aged 18–89 who are at least six months post-onset from a single acute event (e.g., left-hemisphere stroke), with normal or corrected hearing and vision and no progressive neurological disease.

Not a fit: People with neurodegenerative disease, severe motor speech disorders, significant psychiatric or substance-abuse history, uncorrected hearing or vision problems, or those outside the 18–89 age range are unlikely to be eligible or to benefit from these specific interventions.

Why it matters

Potential benefit: If successful, adding metacognitive strategy training could produce larger gains in naming and more informative spontaneous speech for people with chronic aphasia.

How similar studies have performed: Traditional SFA has established evidence for improving naming, while combining SFA with metacognitive strategy training is a newer approach with limited but promising preliminary support.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

* Have aphasia due to a single acute event (e.g., left-hemisphere stroke, traumatic brain injury)
* Be at least six-months post aphasia-onset,
* Be a proficient English speaker,
* Have normal or corrected to normal hearing (i.e., hearing aids) and vision (i.e., eyeglasses),
* Have no history of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., dementia), severe motor speech disorder, significant mental illness, psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse, or neurological condition that could influence their cognitive, language, and memory systems

Exclusion Criteria:

* A history of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., dementia), severe motor speech disorder, significant mental illness, psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse, or neurological condition that could influence their cognitive, language, and memory systems,
* Children under the age of 18,
* Adults over the age of 89,
* Uncorrected hearing and vision.

Where this trial is running

New York, New York

• Teachers College, Columbia University — New York, New York, United States (RECRUITING)

Study contacts

• Study coordinator: Victoria Tilton-Bolowsky, Ph.D. CCC-SLP

Conditions: Aphasia, Aphasia Following Cerebral Infarction, Aphasia, Acquired, Aphasia, Rehabilitation, Aphasia, Anomic, Aphasia, Broca, Aphasia, Conduction, Aphasia, Expressive