| Language | Dutch |
| Inclusion criteria | MRS ≤ 3; ability to perform tasks |
| Number of individuals with aphasia | 12 |
| Number of control participants | 8 |
| Were any of the participants included in any previous studies? | No |
| Is age reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (mean 67.9 ± 11.4 years, range 46-86 years) |
| Is sex reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (males: 10; females: 2) |
| Is handedness reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (right: 12; left: 0) |
| Is time post stroke onset reported and appropriate to the study design? | No* (moderate limitation) (T1: within 2 weeks; T2: ~3 months; T3: ~6 months; T4: ~12 months; specific timing of first time point not stated) |
| To what extent is the nature of aphasia characterized? | Comprehensive battery |
| Language evaluation | AAT, BNT |
| Aphasia severity | T1: 8 moderate, 2 severe, 2 not stated; T2: 4 moderate, 3 recovered, 2 not stated, 1 mild, 1 severe |
| Aphasia type | T1: 6 Broca's, 3 anomic, 2 Wernicke's, 1 global; T2: 4 anomic, 3 recovered, 2 Broca's, 1 unclassified, 1 Wernicke's |
| First stroke only? | Yes |
| Stroke type | Ischemic only |
| To what extent is the lesion distribution characterized? | Lesion overlay |
| Lesion extent | Range 9-208 cc |
| Lesion location | L MCA |
| Participants notes | — |
| Modality | fMRI |
| Is the study cross-sectional or longitudinal? | Longitudinal—recovery |
| If longitudinal, at what time point(s) were imaging data acquired? | T1: within 2 weeks; T2: ~3 months; T3: ~6 months; T4: ~12 months; specific timing of first time point not stated |
| If longitudinal, was there any intervention between the time points? | Not stated |
| Is the scanner described? | Yes (Philips Achieva 3 Tesla) |
| Is the timing of stimulus presentation and image acquisition clearly described and appropriate? | No* (moderate limitation) (stimulus presentation was self-paced, but the ITI is not reported, nor are the number of trials presented per condition; it is likely that the language and control blocks contained different numbers of trials) |
| Design type | Block |
| Total images acquired | 1656 |
| 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? | Yes |
| Imaging notes | not all participants scanned at each time point; the number scanned at each time point is not stated |
| Language condition | Written word-picture matching |
| Control condition | Visual decision |
| Are the conditions matched for visual demands? | No |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| 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? | Somewhat |
| Does the contrast selectively activate plausible relevant language regions in the control group? | No |
| Are activations lateralized in the control data? | Somewhat |
| Control activation notes | Primarily bilateral visual activations; frontal activation is L-lateralized |
| Contrast notes | — |
| Language condition | Semantic decision |
| Control condition | Visual decision |
| Are the conditions matched for visual demands? | No |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| 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? | Somewhat |
| Does the contrast selectively activate plausible relevant language regions in the control group? | Somewhat |
| Are activations lateralized in the control data? | Yes |
| Control activation notes | L frontal, L posterior ITG, L superior parietal |
| Contrast notes | — |
| First level contrast | Written word-picture matching vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (subset who returned for follow-up) T1 (n = 10) |
| Covariate | Subsequent outcome (T4) overall language measure (average of AAT measures) |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 12 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) bilateral dorsal anterior cingulate; (2) L angular gyrus; (3) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (4) L thalamus; (5) L MFG; (6) L posterior ITG; (7) R angular gyrus; (8) R IFG pars triangularis; (9) R thalamus; (10) R posterior ITG; (11) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (12) R MFG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | — |
| Findings | ↑ L posterior inferior temporal gyrus/fusiform gyrus |
| Findings notes | Activation predicted later outcome even when initial language performance was included in the model |
| First level contrast | Written word-picture matching vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (all time points) |
| Covariate | Overall language measure (average of AAT measures) all time points |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 12 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) bilateral dorsal anterior cingulate; (2) L angular gyrus; (3) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (4) L thalamus; (5) L MFG; (6) L posterior ITG; (7) R angular gyrus; (8) R IFG pars triangularis; (9) R thalamus; (10) R posterior ITG; (11) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (12) R MFG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | ↑ L posterior inferior temporal gyrus/fusiform gyrus |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Written word-picture matching vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (all time points) |
| Covariate | Average of AAT comprehension score and BNT, all time points |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 12 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) bilateral dorsal anterior cingulate; (2) L angular gyrus; (3) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (4) L thalamus; (5) L MFG; (6) L posterior ITG; (7) R angular gyrus; (8) R IFG pars triangularis; (9) R thalamus; (10) R posterior ITG; (11) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (12) R MFG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | ↓ R IFG pars opercularis
↓ R IFG pars triangularis |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Written word-picture matching vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (all time points) |
| Covariate | Picture-word matching accuracy, all time points |
| 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? | Accuracy is covariate |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 12 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) bilateral dorsal anterior cingulate; (2) L angular gyrus; (3) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (4) L thalamus; (5) L MFG; (6) L posterior ITG; (7) R angular gyrus; (8) R IFG pars triangularis; (9) R thalamus; (10) R posterior ITG; (11) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (12) R MFG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | ↑ R posterior inferior temporal gyrus/fusiform gyrus |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Written word-picture matching vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Longitudinal change in aphasia |
| Group(s) | Aphasia: linear effect of time |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 12 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) bilateral dorsal anterior cingulate; (2) L angular gyrus; (3) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (4) L thalamus; (5) L MFG; (6) L posterior ITG; (7) R angular gyrus; (8) R IFG pars triangularis; (9) R thalamus; (10) R posterior ITG; (11) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (12) R MFG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | ↑ L dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
↑ L angular gyrus
↑ L posterior inferior temporal gyrus/fusiform gyrus
↑ L anterior cingulate
↑ R dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
↑ R angular gyrus
↑ R anterior cingulate
↑ R thalamus
↓ L IFG pars opercularis
↓ L IFG pars triangularis |
| Findings notes | Similar numbers of findings are reported for controls |
| First level contrast | Semantic decision vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (subset who returned for follow-up) T1 (n = 10) |
| Covariate | Subsequent outcome (T4) overall language measure (average of AAT measures) |
| Is the second level contrast valid in terms of the group(s), time point(s), and measures involved? | Somewhat (not appropriate to correlate T1 imaging with T4 behavior without T1 behavior in model) |
| Is accuracy matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 6 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) L angular gyrus; (2) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (3) L posterior ITG; (4) R angular gyrus; (5) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (6) R posterior ITG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | — |
| Findings | None |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Semantic decision vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (all time points) |
| Covariate | Overall language measure (average of AAT measures) all time points |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 6 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) L angular gyrus; (2) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (3) L posterior ITG; (4) R angular gyrus; (5) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (6) R posterior ITG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | None |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Semantic decision vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (all time points) |
| Covariate | Average of AAT comprehension score and BNT, all time points |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 6 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) L angular gyrus; (2) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (3) L posterior ITG; (4) R angular gyrus; (5) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (6) R posterior ITG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | None |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Semantic decision vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional correlation with language or other measure |
| Group(s) | Aphasia (all time points) |
| Covariate | Semantic decision accuracy, all time points |
| 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? | Accuracy is covariate |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 6 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) L angular gyrus; (2) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (3) L posterior ITG; (4) R angular gyrus; (5) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (6) R posterior ITG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | None |
| Findings notes | — |
| First level contrast | Semantic decision vs visual decision |
| Analysis class | Longitudinal change in aphasia |
| Group(s) | Aphasia: linear effect of time |
| 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? | Unknown, not reported |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Unknown, not reported |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Regions of interest (ROI) |
| ROI type | Functional |
| How many ROIs are there? | 6 |
| What are the ROI(s)? | (1) L angular gyrus; (2) L IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (3) L posterior ITG; (4) R angular gyrus; (5) R IFG pars opercularis and triangularis; (6) R posterior ITG |
| How are the ROI(s) defined? | Control activations and their homotopic counterparts in the R hemisphere; activation measured as count of voxels activated at p < 0.001, uncorrected |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | False discovery rate (FDR) |
| Statistical details | Mixed model; minimal detail provided |
| Findings | ↑ L posterior inferior temporal gyrus/fusiform gyrus
↑ R angular gyrus
↓ L IFG pars opercularis
↓ L IFG pars triangularis |
| Findings notes | Similar numbers of findings are reported for controls |
