View in EDS PDF Full Text

Phonological Treatment for Anomia: A Scoping Review.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Phonological Treatment for Anomia: A Scoping Review.
Authors: Braun, Emily J.1 braune2@ucmail.uc.edu, Castro, Nichol2, Warner, Lynn3
Source: American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. Sep2025, Vol. 34 Issue 5, p2972-2996. 25p.
Subject Terms: *Aphasia, *Chronic diseases, *Quality of life, *Phonology, Medical information storage & retrieval systems, Anomia, Prompts (Psychology), CINAHL database, Psychological well-being, Treatment effectiveness, Systematic reviews, MEDLINE, Online information services, Stroke, Brain injuries, Data analysis software, Psychology information storage & retrieval systems, Disease complications
Abstract: Purpose: The aim of this scoping review was to summarize treatment characteristics (with a focus on treatment ingredients), participant demographic characteristics, and outcomes in the research literature for phonological treatment for anomia. Method: Relevant articles reporting on phonological treatment for anomia in acquired aphasia were identified by a librarian through a comprehensive database search as well as citation chasing of five articles. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction related to the research questions were completed in Covidence by two researchers. Results: A total of 110 articles reporting 152 treatment conditions met inclusion criteria for the study. Treatment conditions generally included relatively small sample sizes of individuals with chronic poststroke aphasia. Treatment conditions were categorized into five broad categories: cueing (i.e., direct phonological cueing), phonological components analysis, contextual priming (i.e., indirect phonological cueing), phonomotor treatment, and other phonological processing approaches (i.e., other types of phonological treatment targeting underlying phonological skills). These treatment categories used a variety of overlapping treatment ingredients. Outcomes were generally positive for naming of trained items with variability for generalization to untrained items and limited reporting of non--impairment-based measures (e.g., functional communication, quality of life). Conclusion: Further review and meta-analysis as well as prospective intervention research for phonological treatment for anomia is needed to identify who may benefit most from phonological treatment for anomia and to determine optimal treatment design parameters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:Purpose: The aim of this scoping review was to summarize treatment characteristics (with a focus on treatment ingredients), participant demographic characteristics, and outcomes in the research literature for phonological treatment for anomia. Method: Relevant articles reporting on phonological treatment for anomia in acquired aphasia were identified by a librarian through a comprehensive database search as well as citation chasing of five articles. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction related to the research questions were completed in Covidence by two researchers. Results: A total of 110 articles reporting 152 treatment conditions met inclusion criteria for the study. Treatment conditions generally included relatively small sample sizes of individuals with chronic poststroke aphasia. Treatment conditions were categorized into five broad categories: cueing (i.e., direct phonological cueing), phonological components analysis, contextual priming (i.e., indirect phonological cueing), phonomotor treatment, and other phonological processing approaches (i.e., other types of phonological treatment targeting underlying phonological skills). These treatment categories used a variety of overlapping treatment ingredients. Outcomes were generally positive for naming of trained items with variability for generalization to untrained items and limited reporting of non--impairment-based measures (e.g., functional communication, quality of life). Conclusion: Further review and meta-analysis as well as prospective intervention research for phonological treatment for anomia is needed to identify who may benefit most from phonological treatment for anomia and to determine optimal treatment design parameters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:10580360
DOI:10.1044/2025_AJSLP-25-00012