Correction to: Success rates of intensive aphasia therapy: real-world data from 448 patients between 2003 and 2020 (Journal of Neurology, (2024), 271, 11, (7169-7183), 10.1007/s00415-024-12429-7)

Abstract

In the original version of this article, In Fig. 3, the gray shades indicating the confidence intervals are missing. In Table 3, for the Repetition subtest, the effect size has been lost in the article (only the 95%CI is in brackets). The effect size should be 0.64. The correct Table 3 should have been. (Table presented.) Comparison of pre- and post-treatment AAT subtests and profile level with raw scores after correction for spontaneous recovery and unadjusted raw scores Raw scores corrected for spontaneous recovery Unadjusted raw scores z value p value Effect size (95% CI) z value p value Effect size (95% CI) Subtests and profile level Token test 4.75 < 0.001* 0.22 (0.11–0.32) 4.40 < 0.001* 0.27 (0.17–0.37) Repetition 11.53 < 0.001* (0.55–0.71) 12.30 < 0.001* 0.64 (0.60–0.75) Written language 9.46 < 0.001* 0.55 (0.47–0.63) 10.91 < 0.001* 0.61 (0.53–0.69) Naming 11.51 < 0.001* 0.66 (0.58–0.73) 12.23 < 0.001* 0.69 (0.62–0.75) Comprehension 7.77 < 0.001* 0.43 (0.33–0.53) 8.70 < 0.001* 0.48 (0.39–0.57) Profile level 13.42 < 0.001* 0.74 (0.66–0.80) 14.69 < 0.001* 0.80 (0.74–0.85) Spontaneous speech subscales Communicative behaviora – – – 9.06 < 0.001* 0.25 (0.19–0.30) Automatized languagea – – – 5.30 < 0.001* 0.22 (0.13–0.30) Articulation and prosodya – – – 10.04 < 0.001* 0.17 (0.11–0.23) Semantic structurea – – – 7.36 < 0.001* 0.26 (0.20–0.32) Phonologic structurea – – – 8.10 < 0.001* 0.21 (0.13–0.28) Syntactic structurea – – – 9.44 < 0.001* 0.20 (0.15–0.26) Comparisons with non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, one-tailed. Test statistics and effect sizes (matched-pairs rank biserial correlation coefficients rc) calculated according to King et al. [30]. CI: confidence interval aNo correction for spontaneous recovery for the spontaneous speech subscales *p < 0.001 The original article has been corrected.