Khwaileh Tariq, Mustafawi Eiman, Elbuy Shereen, Numan Noor, Ulde Samawiyah
Department of English Literature and Linguistics, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.
Department of Linguistics, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2025 Jul-Aug;60(4):e70064. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.70064.
Aphasia has been widely investigated for English and other Indo-European languages such as German, Dutch, Italian and Spanish. It has been reported that published studies on Arabic aphasia only comprised five studies, accounting for only 0.40% of the total literature on aphasia between 2000 and 2009.
The present paper is a systematic review of studies that have been published on Arabic aphasia. The main objective of this study is to review the body of aphasia literature on Arabic, to identify strengths and weaknesses in the available clinical resources for Arabic aphasia.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Five relevant databases were identified and searched using predefined keywords. A 6th source, Google Scholar, was also used to yield grey literature; these sources were screened on Scimago for quality assurance. Predefined eligibility criteria were then applied to the records that the initial search yielded. The final list of included studies was then qualitatively reviewed.
The search yielded 48 studies. The resulting review identified a scarcity of research on assessment materials, efficacy of therapy and interventions and linguistic/psycholinguistic theory that underscores the development of clinical resources for Arabic aphasia. It suggested specific areas where development is required in each category. From the available research, it identified limitations in available materials for clinical assessment in Arabic aphasia. Specifically, that currently available materials are (a) primarily translations and adaptations of other languages rather than being developed with linguistically and culturally specific features of Arabic in mind; (b) are screening and short assessments rather than comprehensive batteries and (c) are not controlled for crucial psycholinguistic variables such as imageability and age of acquisition.
While research on Arabic aphasia has been growing in the past few years, it lacks in several areas of investigation, including certain methodological approaches, the varieties investigated, aphasia types and the formulation of valid assessment protocols and therapy interventions.
What is already known on this subject Aphasia has been widely investigated for English and other Indo-European languages such as German, Dutch, Italian and Spanish. It has been reported that published studies on Arabic aphasia only comprised five studies, accounting for only 0.40% of the total literature on aphasia between 2000 and 2009 (Beveridge and Bak 2011). However, the selection of these studies was done from only 4 journals. There is a need for a comprehensive review of all studies to date on Arabic aphasia following PRISMA guidelines. What this study adds to the existing knowledge This study reviewed 48 studies that presented original data on Arabic aphasia. We found that the majority of these studies were investigative in nature, where aphasic data was used to investigate linguistic or psycholinguistic theory. While these studies have clinical applications too, studies that developed protocols and materials for clinical assessment and tested the efficacy of various therapies and interventions in Arabic were comparatively limited. What are the clinical implications of this work? Specific future directions are provided to aid in the development of assessments and interventions in service of Arabic-speaking persons with aphasia.
失语症已在英语以及德语、荷兰语、意大利语和西班牙语等其他印欧语系语言中得到广泛研究。据报道,关于阿拉伯语失语症的已发表研究仅有五项,仅占2000年至2009年间失语症总文献的0.40%。
本文是对已发表的关于阿拉伯语失语症研究的系统综述。本研究的主要目的是回顾阿拉伯语失语症的文献主体,识别现有阿拉伯语失语症临床资源的优势与不足。
遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。确定了五个相关数据库,并使用预定义关键词进行搜索。还使用了第六个来源谷歌学术来获取灰色文献;这些来源在Scimago上进行质量筛选。然后将预定义的纳入标准应用于初始搜索得到的记录。最后对纳入研究的最终列表进行定性审查。
搜索共得到48项研究。结果综述发现,关于评估材料、治疗和干预的疗效以及语言/心理语言学理论的研究匮乏,这凸显了阿拉伯语失语症临床资源开发的必要性。它指出了每个类别中需要发展的具体领域。从现有研究中,它识别出阿拉伯语失语症临床评估现有材料的局限性。具体而言,目前可用的材料(a)主要是其他语言的翻译和改编,而非考虑到阿拉伯语在语言和文化上的特定特征进行开发;(b)是筛查和简短评估,而非综合测试组;(c)未控制关键的心理语言学变量,如图像性和习得年龄。
虽然过去几年对阿拉伯语失语症的研究一直在增加,但在几个调查领域仍存在不足,包括某些方法学途径、所研究的变体、失语症类型以及有效评估方案和治疗干预的制定。
关于该主题的已知信息 失语症已在英语以及德语、荷兰语、意大利语和西班牙语等其他印欧语系语言中得到广泛研究。据报道,关于阿拉伯语失语症的已发表研究仅有五项,仅占2000年至2009年间失语症总文献的0.40%(贝弗里奇和巴克,2011年)。然而,这些研究仅从4种期刊中选取。需要按照PRISMA指南对迄今为止所有关于阿拉伯语失语症的研究进行全面综述。本研究对现有知识的补充 本研究回顾了48项呈现阿拉伯语失语症原始数据的研究。我们发现这些研究大多具有调查性质,即利用失语症数据来研究语言或心理语言学理论。虽然这些研究也有临床应用,但为阿拉伯语失语症临床评估制定方案和材料并测试各种治疗和干预疗效的研究相对有限。这项工作的临床意义是什么?提供了具体的未来方向,以帮助为讲阿拉伯语的失语症患者开发评估和干预措施。