| Language | US English |
| Inclusion criteria | Residual phonologic retrieval deficit; intact semantic processing |
| Number of individuals with aphasia | 21 |
| 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 56.4 ± 12.5 years, range 30-80 years) |
| Is sex reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (males: 11; females: 10) |
| Is handedness reported for patients and controls, and matched? | Yes (right: 21; left: 0) |
| Is time post stroke onset reported and appropriate to the study design? | Yes (mean 1134 ± 1491 days, range 180-6732 days) |
| To what extent is the nature of aphasia characterized? | Not at all |
| Language evaluation | Pseudoword rhyme matching, semantic picture matching (similar to PPT-P), picture naming |
| Aphasia severity | Not stated |
| Aphasia type | Not stated |
| First stroke only? | Not stated |
| Stroke type | Ischemic only |
| To what extent is the lesion distribution characterized? | Lesion overlay |
| Lesion extent | Mean 73.4 ± 58.6 cc, range 6.7-227.0 cc |
| Lesion location | 17 L MCA, 2 combined L MCA/ACA, combined 2 L MCA/PCA |
| Participants notes | — |
| Modality | fMRI |
| Is the study cross-sectional or longitudinal? | Cross-sectional |
| If longitudinal, at what time point(s) were imaging data acquired? | — |
| If longitudinal, was there any intervention between the time points? | — |
| Is the scanner described? | Yes (GE Excite 3 Tesla) |
| Is the timing of stimulus presentation and image acquisition clearly described and appropriate? | No (precise timing of stimuli not stated; 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? | Yes |
| Imaging notes | — |
| Language condition | Reading nouns aloud (correct trials) |
| Control condition | Reading nouns aloud (incorrect trials) |
| 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? | Yes |
| Is accuracy matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | No, by design |
| Is reaction time matched between the language and control tasks for all relevant groups? | Yes, matched |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Are control data reported in this paper or another that is referenced? | N/A |
| Does the contrast selectively activate plausible relevant language regions in the control group? | N/A |
| Are activations lateralized in the control data? | N/A |
| Control activation notes | Control data N/A because controls do not typically make errors |
| Contrast notes | — |
| First level contrast | Reading nouns aloud (correct trials) vs reading nouns aloud (incorrect trials) |
| Analysis class | Cross-sectional performance-defined conditions |
| Group(s) | Aphasia |
| 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? | No, by design |
| Is reaction time matched across the second level contrast? | Yes, matched |
| Behavioral data notes | — |
| Type of analysis | Voxelwise |
| Search volume | Whole brain |
| Correction for multiple comparisons | Clusterwise correction based on 3dClustSim |
| Software | AFNI |
| Voxelwise p | .01 |
| Cluster extent | 1.609 cc |
| Statistical details | Regarding correction for multiple comparisons, addition of monoexponential function reduces but does not eliminate inflation of p values (Cox et al., 2017) |
| Findings | ↑ L angular gyrus
↓ L ventral precentral/inferior frontal junction
↓ L SMA/medial prefrontal
↓ R insula
↓ R ventral precentral/inferior frontal junction
↓ R SMA/medial prefrontal |
| Findings notes | Positive region (L AG) was part of the semantic network, while many negative regions were positively modulated by reaction time in the aphasia group |
