戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 speech entrainment for rehabilitation of non-fluent aphasia.
2 al aphasia, the two most common kinds of non-fluent aphasia.
3 tical lesion location that gives rise to non-fluent aphasia.
4 ontal features and three had progressive non-fluent aphasia.
5  continuous variation within progressive non-fluent aphasia.
6 ntrainment varies among individuals with non-fluent aphasia.
7 d ARHGAP35 and SERPINA1 with progressive non-fluent aphasia.
8 s disease (45% of cases) and progressive non-fluent aphasia (25% of cases).
9  combination of word comprehension deficits, fluent aphasia and a particularly severe anomia.
10 atively modality specific in progressive non-fluent aphasia and part of a more severe generic semanti
11  processing occurred in both progressive non-fluent aphasia and semantic dementia, and deficits of se
12 tical auditory processing in progressive non-fluent aphasia and semantic dementia, respectively.
13 iant FTD, semantic dementia, progressive non-fluent aphasia, and FTD overlapping with motor neuron di
14  with frontotemporal dementia, including non-fluent aphasia, apathy and impulsivity.
15     All patients developed a progressive non-fluent aphasia culminating in some cases in complete mut
16 analysis were more common in progressive non-fluent aphasia, deficits of apperceptive processing occu
17 tegories based on the traditional fluent/non-fluent aphasia distinction.
18 progressive aphasia [12 with progressive non-fluent aphasia; eight with semantic dementia].
19                                          Non-fluent aphasia implies a relatively straightforward neur
20 , corticobasal syndrome, and progressive non-fluent aphasia) localize to different disease-specific b
21 impairment that was either a progressive non-fluent aphasia or decreased speech output consistent wit
22 rpersonal functioning, and patients with non-fluent aphasia overestimated emotional and interpersonal
23 c dementia (SD) and six with progressive non-fluent aphasia (PA), as compared to 28 individuals with
24 totemporal dementia (bvFTD), progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) (or a mixed aphasia) and semantic
25 ontotemporal dementia (FTD), progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) and semantic dementia.
26  The speech of patients with progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) has often been described clinicall
27                              Progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) is a syndrome in which patients lo
28 D and the other in a case of progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) without any apparent family histor
29 f ARHGAP35 and SERPINA1 with progressive non-fluent aphasia point towards a potential role of the str
30             In patients with progressive non-fluent aphasia, recent work has emphasized an impairment
31 ent aphasic speech; when they are undamaged, fluent aphasias result.
32 ith frontotemporal dementia, progressive non-fluent aphasia, semantic dementia or mixture of these sy
33 sions in areas typically associated with non-fluent aphasia, such as the superior longitudinal fascic
34  a clearer picture of cortical damage in non-fluent aphasia, the current study examined brain damage
35 ral technique that enables patients with non-fluent aphasia to speak fluently.
36                              Progressive non-fluent aphasia was most commonly associated with tau pat
37 tia and, with one exception, progressive non-fluent aphasia were associated with transactive response
38                Patients with progressive non-fluent aphasia were more likely to show severe auditory