Russia has rich theoretical and behavioral research traditions in neurolinguistics and neuropsychology, but at the beginning of the twenty-first century contemporary experimental research in these disciplines remained limited, leading to proliferation of non-evidence-based approaches in education, healthcare, and public beliefs. An academic response to this was the establishment of the Center for Language and Brain at the HSE University, Moscow, which focused on experimental psycho- and neurolinguistic research and related evidence-based practices. The Center has grown from a small group of young researchers to a large interdisciplinary unit that conducts cutting-edge research utilizing multi-site settings and novel structural and functional neuroimaging methods. The overarching aim of the Centers research is to promote scientifically grounded treatment of the language-brain relationship in the educational, clinical, and industry settings. Specifically, translational research at the Center is contributing to the advancement of clinical practice in Russia: from providing the first standardized aphasia language test to implementing protocols for intraoperative language mapping in neurosurgery departments across the country. Within research projects, a new generation of scientists is successfully being fostered, while a broader student audience is reached via courses taught by staff of the Center to students of different majors. Notable examples of public outreach programs at the Center are the Annual Summer Neurolinguistics School attracting hundreds of attendees from different countries each year, and community projects focused on raising awareness about aphasia. Together, these efforts aim to increase scientific knowledge in a multi-professional audience. In this paper, we will share our joint experiences in establishing, building, and promoting a neurolinguistics research center in Russia and the impact that this work has had on the broader public. We will delineate specific milestones of this journey and focus on the main pillars that have contributed to our progress: research, clinical work, teaching, and public outreach programs. We hope that this critical appraisal of our experiences can serve simultaneously as an inspiration and a practical guide for other groups developing research, clinical, and educational programs in different neuroscientific disciplines across the globe and aiming to improve the quality of the neuroscientific information available to the public.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that individuals with aphasia have impairments in switching attention compared to healthy controls. However, there is insufficient information about the characteristics of switching attention within one task and whether attention deficits vary depending on aphasia type and lesion location. We aimed to address these knowledge gaps by investigating characteristics of switching attention within one type of task in participants with different types of aphasia and distinct lesion sites. METHOD: Forty individuals with post-stroke aphasia (20 with non-fluent aphasia and frontal lobe damage, and 20 with fluent aphasia and temporal lobe damage) and 20 neurologically healthy age-matched individuals performed an attention switching task. They listened to sequences of high-pitched and low-pitched tones that were presented to them one by one, tallied them separately, and, at the end of each sequence, had to say how many high- and low-pitched tones they had heard. RESULTS: Participants with aphasia performed significantly worse on the task compared to healthy controls, and the performance of two aphasia groups also differed. Specifically, individuals with both aphasia types made more errors than healthy individuals, and the participants with non-fluent aphasia responded more slowly than controls, while reaction times of the participants with fluent aphasia did not differ significantly from those of controls. Also, the two groups of participants with aphasia differed significantly in accuracy, with individuals in the non-fluent group making more errors. CONCLUSIONS: The data demonstrated that people with different types of aphasia have distinct impairments in switching attention. Since cognitive deficits impact language performance, this information is important for differentially addressing their language problems and selecting more specific and optimal rehabilitation programs that target different underlying mechanisms.

The lack of standardized language assessment tools in Russian impedes clinical work, evidence-based practice, and research in Russian-speaking clinical populations. To address this gap in assessment of neurogenic language disorders, we developed and standardized a new comprehensive assessment instrument-the Russian Aphasia Test (RAT). The principal novelty of the RAT is that each subtest corresponds to a specific level of linguistic processing (phonological, lexical-semantic, syntactic, and discourse) in different domains: auditory comprehension, repetition, and oral production. In designing the test, we took into consideration various (psycho)linguistic factors known to influence language performance, as well as specific properties of Russian. The current paper describes the development of the RAT and reports its psychometric properties. A tablet-based version of the RAT was administered to 85 patients with different types and severity of aphasia and to 106 age-matched neurologically healthy controls. We established cutoff values for each subtest indicating deficit in a given task and cutoff values for aphasia based on the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis of the composite score. The RAT showed very high sensitivity (> .93) and specificity (> .96), substantiating its validity for determining presence of aphasia. The tests high construct validity was evidenced by strong correlations between subtests measuring similar linguistic processes. The concurrent validity of the test was also strong as demonstrated by a high correlation with an existing aphasia battery. Overall high internal, inter-rater, and test-retest reliability were obtained. The RAT is the first comprehensive aphasia language battery in Russian with properly established psychometric properties. It is sensitive to a wide range of language deficits in aphasia and can reliably characterize individual profiles of language impairments. Notably, the RAT is the first comprehensive aphasia test in any language to be fully automatized for administration on a tablet, maximizing further standardization of presentation and scoring procedures.

Unlike stroke, neurosurgical removal of left-hemisphere gliomas acts upon a reorganized language network and involves brain areas rarely damaged by stroke. We addressed whether this causes the profiles of neurosurgery- and stroke-induced language impairments to be distinct. K-means clustering of language assessment data (neurosurgery cohort: N = 88, stroke cohort: N = 95) identified similar profiles in both cohorts. But critically, a cluster of individuals with specific phonological deficits was only evident in the stroke but not in the neurosurgery cohort. Thus, phonological deficits are less clearly distinguished from other language deficits after glioma surgery compared to stroke. Furthermore, the correlations between language production and comprehension scores at different linguistic levels were more extensive in the neurosurgery than in the stroke cohort. Our findings suggest that neurosurgery-induced language impairments do not correspond to those caused by stroke, but rather manifest as a moderate global aphasia - a generalized decline of language processing abilities.