Semantic Feature Analysis with versus without Metacognitive Strategy Training for adults with aphasia
Official title: Comparing the Effectiveness of Traditional Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) Versus SFA Plus Metacognitive Strategy Training (SFA+MST) for People With Acquired Aphasia
Run by Teachers College, Columbia University · NCT07036406 · Data updated 2026-11-12
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 | Phase 2 |
|---|---|
| Study type | Interventional |
| Ages | 18 Years to 89 Years |
| Sex | All |
| Enrollment | 40 (estimated) |
| Sponsor | Teachers College, Columbia University Academic / other |
| Locations | 1 site (New York, New York) |
| Status | Recruiting |
| Started | July 28, 2025 |
| Main results expected | December 2026 |
| Study ends | July 2027 |
| Registry record updated | June 25, 2026 |
| Trial ID | NCT07036406 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
Is this trial a fit for you?
✓Likely a 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.
✕Probably 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.
A plain-English reading of the study's rules. Only the study team can confirm whether you qualify.
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.
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 gone: 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.
Who can join: the full rules
Show full inclusion / exclusion 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 it's running
-
Teachers College, Columbia University
New York, New York, United States Recruiting
Study contacts
- Study coordinator: Victoria Tilton-Bolowsky, Ph.D. CCC-SLP
- Email: veb2119@tc.columbia.edu
- Phone: 212-678-8302
Similar studies
Other studies for the same condition or treatment. Recruiting studies are listed first.
-
High-intensity exercise to improve recovery after post-stroke aphasia
This tests whether a 12-week high-intensity group exercise program helps people with post-stroke aphasia improve physical fitness, language, thinking, and mood compared with low-intensity exercise.
-
Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Language Therapy to Improve Mild Aphasia
This study is testing whether combining brain stimulation with speech therapy can help people with mild aphasia after a stroke improve their speaking and understanding skills.
-
Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Language Therapy to Improve Speech After Stroke
This study is testing if combining a brain stimulation technique with speech therapy can help people who have had a stroke improve their speech during the early recovery phase.
-
Using brain stimulation to improve language skills after stroke
This study is testing whether a type of brain stimulation can help people with language problems after a stroke improve their speaking and understanding skills.
-
See how language and general thinking networks help aphasia recovery
This study tests whether language and general cognitive networks contribute to language recovery after stroke in people with aphasia.
-
Aphasia rehabilitation with tDCS as added to speech therapy
We are testing whether adding non-invasive brain stimulation (tDCS) to speech therapy helps people with Broca's aphasia after stroke more than speech therapy alone.
How to take part
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Check the official listing on ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest contact details and recruitment status.
- Contact the study coordinator or principal investigator to ask for pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.