Systematic Reviewshttps://hdl.handle.net/1808/280882024-03-29T06:10:36Z2024-03-29T06:10:36ZInvestigating NIBS for language rehabilitation in aphasiaKidwai, JuhiSharma, SaryuPeper, MichaelBrumberg, Jonathanhttps://hdl.handle.net/1808/340972023-04-14T06:07:48Z2022-07-04T00:00:00ZInvestigating NIBS for language rehabilitation in aphasia
Kidwai, Juhi; Sharma, Saryu; Peper, Michael; Brumberg, Jonathan
Purpose
The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and synthesize research on interventions in which noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) was used to improve linguistic abilities in individuals with aphasia. NIBS comprising transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are emerging technologies with potential to improve the underlying neurobiology of language in brains with stroke-induced lesions.
Methods
The results of a systematic search of electronic literature databases were reviewed in CADIMA software by two authors yielding 57 studies published between 2015 and 2022. Selected articles were reviewed for study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, and outcome measures.
Results
NIBS is largely used for non-fluent aphasia during the chronic phase of recovery for improving naming and comprehension using picture naming and auditory comprehension of words, commands, and small paragraphs. Standardized test materials are used to measure treatment efficiency, with neuroimaging gradually emerging as an added measure to assess the neurobiological changes arising as a result of treatment induced linguistic recovery.
Conclusion
The findings from this scoping review describe the design and delivery of NIBS treatment from subacute to chronic stages of recovery in aphasia. Positive results from heterogenous studies show the potential of NIBS in improving linguistic outcomes for people with aphasia. Large scale clinical trials and systematic reviews should further substantiate our findings of NIBS efficiency for specific language skills (e.g., naming accuracy, sentence production, discourse comprehension).
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Aphasiology on 04 Jul 2022, available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02687038.2022.2089972.
2022-07-04T00:00:00ZSystematic Review WorkshopPeper, MichaelMcEathron, ScottMonroe-Gulick, AmaliaOrth-Alfie, Carmenhttps://hdl.handle.net/1808/340722023-04-07T06:08:04Z2023-04-06T00:00:00ZSystematic Review Workshop
Peper, Michael; McEathron, Scott; Monroe-Gulick, Amalia; Orth-Alfie, Carmen
In this workshop we will provide an introduction to systematic review with an emphasis on using Covidence, a systematic review management software platform licensed by KU Libraries. Covidence helps researchers to manage all phases of evidence synthesis research projects (e.g. systematic reviews, meta-analysis). Users can collaborate on importing citations, screening, quality assessment, data extraction, and exporting results. This workshop will focus on phases of the review research process.
This 2.5-hour session was held in Watson Library in the Clark Instruction Center on March 31, 2023. Scott McEathron, Amalia Monroe-Gulick, Carmen Orth-Alfie, and Michael Peper presented on behalf of the Libraries systematic review service.
2023-04-06T00:00:00ZSystematic Review Methodology WorkshopPeper, MichaelMcEathron, ScottMonroe-Gulick, AmaliaDvorak, Abbeyhttps://hdl.handle.net/1808/300902020-11-11T09:00:20Z2019-09-13T00:00:00ZSystematic Review Methodology Workshop
Peper, Michael; McEathron, Scott; Monroe-Gulick, Amalia; Dvorak, Abbey
In this introduction to systematic review methodology, the topics discussed include an overview to review projects and different types of reviews, an overview of the research process and team formation, how to develop an appropriate research question, search strategy, the screening process, analysis, and preparation of a manuscript.
This three-hour session was held in Watson Library in the Clark Instruction Center on September 13, 2019. Scott McEathron, Amalia Monroe-Gulick, and Michael Peper presented on behalf of the Libraries and Abbey Dvorak, Music Therapy presented the faculty perspective based on her systematic review project.
2019-09-13T00:00:00ZBehavioral Economic Measurement of Cigarette Demand: A Descriptive Review of Published Approaches to the Cigarette Purchase TaskReed, Derek D.Naudé, Gideon P.Salzer, Allyson R.Peper, MichaelMonroe-Gulick, Amalia L.Gelino, Brett W.Harsin, Joshua D.Foster, Rachel N. S.Nighbor, Tyler D.Kaplan, Brent A.Koffarnus, Mikhail N.Higgins, Stephen T.https://hdl.handle.net/1808/299082022-06-21T19:00:27Z2020-01-01T00:00:00ZBehavioral Economic Measurement of Cigarette Demand: A Descriptive Review of Published Approaches to the Cigarette Purchase Task
Reed, Derek D.; Naudé, Gideon P.; Salzer, Allyson R.; Peper, Michael; Monroe-Gulick, Amalia L.; Gelino, Brett W.; Harsin, Joshua D.; Foster, Rachel N. S.; Nighbor, Tyler D.; Kaplan, Brent A.; Koffarnus, Mikhail N.; Higgins, Stephen T.
The cigarette purchase task (CPT) is a behavioral economic method for assessing demand for cigarettes. Growing interest in behavioral correlates of tobacco use in clinical and general populations as well as empirical efforts to inform policy has seen an increase in published articles employing the CPT. Accordingly, an examination of the published methods and procedures for obtaining these behavioral economic metrics is timely. The purpose of this investigation was to provide a review of published approaches to using the CPT. We searched specific Boolean operators ([“behavioral economic” AND “purchase task”] OR [“demand” AND “cigarette”]) and identified 49 empirical articles published through the year 2018 that reported administering a CPT. Articles were coded for participant characteristics (e.g., sample size, population type, age), CPT task structure (e.g., price framing, number and sequence of prices; vignettes, contextual factors), and data analytic approach (e.g., method of generating indices of cigarette demand). Results of this review indicate no standard approach to administering the CPT and underscore the need for replicability of these behavioral economic measures for the purpose of guiding clinical and policy decisions.
2020-01-01T00:00:00Z