Research Article

The Effectiveness of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) Paradigms as Treatment Options for Recovery of Language Deficits in Chronic Poststroke Aphasia

Table 2

Categorical language and cognitive scores at posttreatment and follow-up compared to baseline for P1, P2, and P3.

Participant itemP1P2P3
B1B2P-TMSF1F2F3B1B2P-TMSF1B1B2P-TMSF1

Problem-solving skills7/368/368/368/367/367/3627/3630/3628/3632/3635/3634/3633/3635/36
Auditory comprehension12/6413/6413/6426/6424/6424/6418/6418/6421/6424/6431/6429/6430/6431/64
Expressive language (Boston naming test—excluded)0.5/260.5/262/261/261/261/264/264/265/266/2613.5/2613.5/2613.5/2615/26
Naming—accuracy1/340/341/340/341/341/344/342/342/346/3417/3412/3414/3415.5/34
Reading skills2/292/292/295/296/294/2914/2914/2917/2916/2914/2919/2918/2919/29

Key: P1: participant 1; P2: participant 2; P3: participant 3; B1: baseline 1; B2: baseline 2; P-TMS: post-TMS (1 day posttreatment); F1: follow-up 1 (2 months posttreatment); F2: follow-up 2 (1 year posttreatment); F3: follow-up 3 (2 years posttreatment).