Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 30;5(4):402–413. doi: 10.1177/2396987320934935

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Unified Aphasia Score (UnAS) percent change: Panel A: rTMS (Mdn = 18.3, IQR = 53.5), ctDCS (Mdn = 7.4, IQR = 25.8), sham (Mdn = 5.6, IQR = 6.5), p = .789; Panel B: rTMS (Mdn = 3.0, IQR = 5.9), ctDCS (Mdn = 17.5, IQR = 27.4), sham (Mdn = 23.6, IQR = 36.7), p = .042; Post-hoc tests show sham > rTMS (χ2(1) = 7.244; p = .021; ϕ = 0.65, large effect); Panel C: rTMS (Mdn = 33.2, IQR = 46.8), ctDCS (Mdn = 26.8, IQR = 47.5), sham (Mdn = 12.5, IQR = 7.9), p = .009; post-hoc tests show rTMS > sham (χ2(1) = 11.733; p = .002; ϕ = 0.73, very large effect); Panel D: rTMS (Mdn = 6.7, IQR = 27.5), ctDCS (Mdn = 24.7, IQR = 87.1), sham (Mdn = 75.0, IQR = 86.9), p = .007; post-hoc tests show sham > rTMS (χ2(1) = 13.442; p = .001; ϕ = 0.89, very large effect).