PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research· 2026Q1

Dose Considerations and Generalization Following Script Training for Poststroke Aphasia: A Randomized Factorial Clinical Trial

Leora Reiff Cherney, Laura E. Kinsey, Erin E. Blaze, Elizabeth Gray et al.

Short summary

Massed practice (10 sessions) of script training for poststroke aphasia improved performance more than distributed practice, while long scripts showed greater generalization with distributed practice. Short scripts were better maintained at 6-week follow-up.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Massed practice of script training showed greater improvement than distributed practice in poststroke aphasia.
  • Long scripts generalized better with distributed practice, while short scripts were better maintained at 6-week follow-up.
  • No significant difference was found between long and short scripts for stimulus repetition.
  • Eighty-five participants with chronic poststroke aphasia were enrolled in the factorial randomized trial.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Using script training as an intervention, this study modulated the dose parameters of stimulus repetition (i.e., long vs. short scripts) and session frequency (i.e., distributed vs. massed practice) and assessed their impact on maintenance and generalization in people with chronic poststroke aphasia. METHOD: The study was a single-site, factorial, single-blind randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized in a 2 × 2 factorial design into one of four study arms, stratified by pretreatment aphasia severity: (a) distributed/short script, (b) distributed/long script, (c) massed/short script, and (d) massed/long script. Participants completed 10, 1-hr sessions of computer-based script training. Participants were assigned to one of four levels of script complexity with levels determined by aphasia severity. The primary generalization outcome measured performance on the trained script in a simulated conversation with a familiar speech-language pathologist posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included evaluating (a) maintenance of the primary outcome at 3 and 6 weeks posttreatment and (b) generalization of the trained script content to an unstructured conversation with an unfamiliar, naive partner at baseline, posttreatment, and 6 weeks posttreatment. RESULTS: Eighty-five participants with aphasia enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference between groups from baseline to posttreatment and follow-up for stimulus repetition, but there was a significant difference for session frequency with massed performing better than distributed. Factor interactions over time indicated that long scripts showed greater improvements with distributed versus massed session frequency, whereas short scripts were better maintained than long scripts at 6-week follow-up. Within groups, there was significant improvement from baseline to posttreatment, which was generally maintained at 6 weeks posttreatment. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide further evidence supporting the efficacy of script training. Dose parameters such as session frequency and stimulus repetition may impact the maintenance and generalization of treatment and should be considered when delivering this and other aphasia treatments. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.33990859.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Cognitive Neuroscience

Cognitive NeuroscienceNeuroscience