| Language | Canadian French |
| Inclusion criteria | Moderate-severe aphasia; anomia |
| Number of individuals with aphasia | 9 |
| Number of control participants | 0 |
| Were any of the participants included in any previous studies? | No |
| Is age reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (mean 62 ± 6.0 years, range 50-67 years) |
| Is sex reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (males: 5; females: 4) |
| Is handedness reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (right: 9; left: 0) |
| Is time post stroke onset reported and appropriate to the study design? | Yes (mean 110.2 ± 92.5 months, range 50-300 months) |
| To what extent is the nature of aphasia characterized? | Comprehensive battery |
| Language evaluation | Montreal-Toulouse Aphasia Battery, picture naming |
| Aphasia severity | Moderate-severe |
| Aphasia type | 7 Broca's, 1 Broca's + AoS, 1 Wernicke's + AoS |
| First stroke only? | Yes |
| Stroke type | Not stated |
| To what extent is the lesion distribution characterized? | Lesion overlay |
| Lesion extent | Range 14.6-295.8 cc |
| Lesion location | L MCA |
| Participants notes | — |
| Modality | fMRI |
| Is the study cross-sectional or longitudinal? | Longitudinal—chronic treatment |
| If longitudinal, at what time point(s) were imaging data acquired? | T1: pre-treatment/chronic; T2: post-treatment, 3-6 weeks later (after 80% performance on trained items, or 6 weeks) |
| If longitudinal, was there any intervention between the time points? | Semantic feature analysis, 1 hour/day, 3 days/week, 3-6 weeks |
| Is the scanner described? | Yes (Siemens Trio 3 Tesla) |
| Is the timing of stimulus presentation and image acquisition clearly described and appropriate? | No (total images acquired not stated) |
| Design type | Event-related |
| Total images acquired | not stated |
| Are the imaging acquisition parameters, including coverage, adequately described and appropriate? | Yes (whole brain) |
| Is preprocessing and intrasubject coregistration adequately described and appropriate? | Yes |
| Is first level model fitting adequately described and appropriate? | Yes |
| Is intersubject normalization adequately described and appropriate? | No (lesion impact not addressed) |
| Imaging notes | — |
| Language condition | Picture naming (T1: known items; T2: trained items; correct trials) |
| Control condition | Viewing scrambled images and saying "baba" |
| Are the conditions matched for visual demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for auditory demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for motor demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for cognitive/executive demands? | No |
| Is accuracy matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Yes, correct trials only |
| Is reaction time matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Are control data reported in this paper or another that is referenced? | No |
| Does the contrast selectively activate plausible relevant language regions in the control group? | Unknown |
| Are activations lateralized in the control data? | Unknown |
| Control activation notes | — |
| Contrast notes | Different contrasts at different time points not clearly explained |
| Language condition | Picture naming (known items, correct trials) |
| Control condition | Viewing scrambled images and saying "baba" |
| Are the conditions matched for visual demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for auditory demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for motor demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for cognitive/executive demands? | No |
| Is accuracy matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Yes, correct trials only |
| Is reaction time matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Are control data reported in this paper or another that is referenced? | No |
| Does the contrast selectively activate plausible relevant language regions in the control group? | Unknown |
| Are activations lateralized in the control data? | Unknown |
| Control activation notes | — |
| Contrast notes | Different contrasts at different time points not clearly explained |
| Language condition | Picture naming (trained items, correct trials) |
| Control condition | Viewing scrambled images and saying "baba" |
| Are the conditions matched for visual demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for auditory demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for motor demands? | Yes |
| Are the conditions matched for cognitive/executive demands? | No |
| Is accuracy matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Yes, correct trials only |
| Is reaction time matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Are control data reported in this paper or another that is referenced? | No |
| Does the contrast selectively activate plausible relevant language regions in the control group? | Unknown |
| Are activations lateralized in the control data? | Unknown |
| Control activation notes | — |
| Contrast notes | Different contrasts at different time points not clearly explained |
| First level contrast | Picture naming (T1: known items; T2: trained items; correct trials) vs viewing scrambled images and saying "baba" |
| Analysis class | Longitudinal change in aphasia |
| Group(s) | Aphasia T2 vs T1 |
| Covariate | — |
| Is the second level contrast valid in terms of the group(s), time point(s), and measures involved? | Yes |
| Is accuracy matched across the second level contrast? | Yes, correct trials only |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Voxelwise |
| Search volume | Whole brain |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | No direct comparison |
| Software | SPM5 |
| Voxelwise p | — |
| Cluster extent | — |
| Statistical details | Qualitative comparison on p. 1780; different contrasts at different time points not clearly explained |
| Findings | ↑ L supramarginal gyrus
↓ L dorsal precentral
↓ L posterior MTG |
| Findings notes | Labels based on figures rather than text |
| First level contrast | Picture naming (known items, correct trials) vs viewing scrambled images and saying "baba" |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia T1 |
| Covariate | Subsequent Δ (T2 vs T1) naming of trained items |
| Is the second level contrast valid in terms of the group(s), time point(s), and measures involved? | Somewhat (T1 behavioral measure should be included in model) |
| Is accuracy matched across the second level contrast? | Yes, correct trials only |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Voxelwise |
| Search volume | Whole brain |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | Clusterwise correction based on arbitrary cluster extent |
| Software | SPM5 |
| Voxelwise p | .005 |
| Cluster extent | 10 voxels (size not stated) |
| Statistical details | Different contrasts at different time points not clearly explained |
| Findings | ↑ L dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
↑ L SMA/medial prefrontal
↑ L somato-motor
↑ L anterior cingulate
↑ R dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
↑ R somato-motor
↑ R thalamus |
| Findings notes | Labels based on figures and text |
| First level contrast | Picture naming (trained items, correct trials) vs viewing scrambled images and saying "baba" |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia T2 |
| Covariate | Previous Δ (T2 vs T1) naming of trained items |
| Is the second level contrast valid in terms of the group(s), time point(s), and measures involved? | No (T2 activation not an appropriate measure of treatment-induced recovery because it reflects T2 performance) |
| Is accuracy matched across the second level contrast? | Yes, correct trials only |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Voxelwise |
| Search volume | Whole brain |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | Clusterwise correction based on arbitrary cluster extent |
| Software | SPM5 |
| Voxelwise p | .005 |
| Cluster extent | 10 voxels (size not stated) |
| Statistical details | Different contrasts at different time points not clearly explained |
| Findings | ↑ L somato-motor |
| Findings notes | Label based on figure |
