What do systematic reviews say?

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT probably leads to higher functional communication compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (moderate certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.28 [0.06, 0.49]
  10 studies · 376 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months)

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: SLT changes expressive language: naming (6 months compared with no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months) (very low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.07
  3 studies · 111 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months)

Summary of findings: SLT showed no clear difference in number of dropouts (for any reason) compared with no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months) (moderate certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.73 [0.38, 1.39]
  6 studies · 322 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: SLT vs social support and stimulation

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings: SLT vs social support and stimulation

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: SLT changes expressive language: naming compared with social support and stimulation (very low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 1.24
  3 studies · 33 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings: SLT vs social support and stimulation

Summary of findings: SLT may leads to lower number of dropouts for any reason compared with social support and stimulation (low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.51 [0.32, 0.82]
  5 studies · 413 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT showed no clear difference in receptive language: auditory comprehension compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.06
  9 studies · 399 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT probably leads to higher receptive language: reading comprehension compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (moderate certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.29 [0.03, 0.55]
  8 studies · 253 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT showed no clear difference in expressive language: naming compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.14
  7 studies · 275 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT may leads to higher expressive language: general compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 1.28 [0.38, 2.19]
  7 studies · 248 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT probably leads to higher expressive language: written compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (moderate certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.41 [0.14, 0.67]
  8 studies · 253 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (immediate outcome)

Summary of findings: SLT showed no clear difference in number of dropouts (for any reason) compared with no SLT (immediate outcome) (moderate certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.89 [0.64, 1.25]
  13 studies · 921 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months)

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: SLT changes functional communication (6 months compared with no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months) (very low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.19
  2 studies · 111 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings: SLT vs no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months)

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: SLT changes receptive language: auditory comprehension (6 months compared with no SLT (follow‐up at 6 months) (very low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 1.38
  2 studies · 111 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings: SLT A vs SLT B

Summary of findings: SLT A may leads to higher functional communication compared with SLT B (low certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 11.75 [4.09, 19.4]
  2 studies · 84 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: SLT A vs SLT B

Summary of findings: SLT A probably leads to higher severity of impairment compared with SLT B (moderate certainty).

• Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.38 [0.07, 0.69]
  5 studies · 187 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: intervention vs no treatment

• Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  27 studies · 3423 participants
  Moderate
• Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  9 studies · 540 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: intervention vs usual care or attention control

• Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  6 studies · 260 participants
  Moderate
• Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings: intervention vs usual care or attention control

• Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  13 studies · 967 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings: intervention vs usual care or attention control

• Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3 studies · 160 participants
  Low