Helpful resources for your practice.

Download from our library of materials in PDF format to use as handouts for your patients, caregivers, or even to decorate your office wall.

How Constant Therapy Revolutionizes Brain Recovery

Getting Started For Clinicians

Getting Started For Patients

Exercise Guide

Recommended Exercises By Impairment Level

Brain Guide

How Brain Injury Impacts Daily Life

Effectiveness Of Rehab Using An iPad

Digital Intervention For Residents With Dementia

Detecting Onset Of Second Stroke From Constant Therapy Data

Comparison Of Therapy Practice At Home And In The Clinic

The Learning Corp research

The Learning Corp, makers of Constant Therapy, is home to one of the world’s largest brain rehabilitation databases - one that continues to grow every day.

The Learning Corp—areas of clinical investigation

Scientific areas of investigation include stroke, TBI, and neurological disorders such as aphasia, dementia, and Alzheimer’s.

Constant Therapy—by the numbers

  • Every 3.5 seconds, a patient completes a Constant Therapy exercise
  • Thousands of clinicians recommend Constant Therapy as an integral part of their therapy programs
  • 100,000 Constant Therapy users
  • 80 million Constant Therapy exercises completed
  • Limitless exercises can be generated by Constant Therapy, as each are continuously updated and expanded with every year

Current therapy domains addressed by Constant Therapy


  • Arithmetic
  • Quantitative reasoning
  • Analytical reasoning
  • Visuospatial processing
  • Auditory memory
  • Visual memory
  • Attention

Speech and Language

  • Writing
  • Reading
  • Speaking
  • Sentence planning
  • Word retrieval
  • Auditory comprehension
  • Phonological processing

Clinical research using Constant Therapy

In a number of controlled clinical trials using Constant Therapy, compelling results demonstrate the benefit of using standardized and personalized therapy on a digital platform.

View Research using Constant Therapy
  1. Kiran S, Godlove J, Advani M, Anantha V. Personalizing rehabilitation for stroke survivors: a big data approach Presented at: International Stroke Conference; February 22-24, 2017; Houston, TX.
  2. Des Roches CA, Mitko A, Kiran S. Relationship between self-administered cues and rehabilitation outcomes in individuals with aphasia: understanding individual responsiveness to a technology-based rehabilitation program. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:07. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2017.00007.
  3. Mallet KH, Shamloul RM, Corbett D, et al. RecoverNow: Feasibility of a mobile tablet-based rehabilitation intervention to treat post-stroke communication deficits in the acute care setting. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0167950. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167950.
  4. Glynn P, Eom S, Zelko F, Koh S. Feasibility of a mobile cognitive intervention in childhood absence epilepsy. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016;10:575. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00575.
  5. Postman WA. Computer-mediated cognitive-communicative intervention for residents with dementia in a special care unit: an exploratory investigation. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2016;1(SIG 15):68-78. doi:10.1044/persp1.SIG15.68.
  6. Mark J, Onaral B, Ayaz H. Evaluating neural correlates of constant therapy neurorehabilitation task battery: an fNIRS pilot study. Presented at: 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction; July 17-22, 2016; Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  7. Kiran S. How does severity of aphasia influence individual responsiveness to rehabilitation? Using big data to understand theories of aphasia rehabilitation. Semin Speech Lang. 2016;37(1):48-59. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1571358.
  8. Des Roches CA, Balachandran I, Ascenso E, Tripodis Y, Kiran S. Effectiveness of an impairment-based individualized rehabilitation program using an iPad-based software platform. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;8:1015. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.01015.
  9. Kiran S, Des Roches CA, Balachandran I, Ascenso E. Development of an impairment-based individualized treatment workflow using an iPad-based software platform. Semin Speech Lang. 2014;35(1):38-50. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1362995.
  10. Kiran S. Detecting small and large scale fluctuations in language and cognitive performance: a longitudinal rehabilitation case study. Int J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;2(suppl):203. doi:10.4172/2329-9096.1000203.
View the Clinical Evidence behind Constant Therapy
  1. Abel S, Willmes K, Huber W. Model‐oriented naming therapy: testing predictions of a connectionist model. Aphasiology. 2007;21(5):411-447. doi:10.1080/02687030701192687.
  2. Annoni JM, Khateb A, Custodi MC, Debeauvais V, Michel CM, Landis T. Advantage of semantic language therapy in chronic aphasia: a study of three cases. Aphasiology. 1998;12(12):1093-1105. doi:10.1080/02687039808249475.
  3. Ball AL, de Riesthal M, Breeding, VE, Mendoza DE. Modified ACT and CART in severe aphasia. Aphasiology. 2011;25(6-7):836-848. doi:10.1080/02687038.2010.544320.
  4. Baldwin VN, Powell T. Google Calendar: A single case experimental design study of a man with severe memory problems. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2015;25(4):617-636. doi:10.1080/09602011.2014.956764.
  5. Beeson PM, Egnor H. Combining treatment for written and spoken naming. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006;12(6):816-827. doi:10.1017/S1355617706061005.
  6. Beeson PM, Rising K, Kim ES, Rapcsak SZ. A novel method for examining response to spelling treatment. Aphasiology. 2008;22(7-8):707-717. doi:10.1080/02687030701800826.
  7. Beeson PM, Hirsch FM, Rewega MA. Successful single-word writing treatment: experimental analyses of four cases. Aphasiology. 2002;16(4-6):473-491. doi:10.1080/02687030244000167.
  8. Beeson PM, Rising K, Volk J. Writing treatment for severe aphasia: who benefits? J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2003;46(5):1038-1060. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2003/083).
  9. Berryman A, Rasavage K, Politzer T. Practical clinical treatment strategies for evaluation and treatment of visual field loss and visual inattention. NeuroRehabilitation. 2010;27(3):261-268. doi:10.3233/NRE-2010-0607.
  10. Brunsdon R, Nickels L, Coltheart M, Joy P. Assessment and treatment of childhood topographical disorientation: a case study. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2007;17(1):53-94. doi:10.1080/09602010600562575.
  11. Cicerone KD. Remediation of “working attention” in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2002;16(3):185-195. doi:10.1080/02699050110103959.
  12. Cipriani G, Bianchetti A, Trabucchi M. Outcomes of a computer-based cognitive rehabilitation program on Alzheimer’s disease patients compared with those on patients affected by mild cognitive impairment. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2006;43(3):327-335. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2005.12.003.
  13. Corsten S, Mende M, Cholewa J, Huber W. Treatment of input and output phonology in aphasia: a single case study. Aphasiology. 2007;21(6-8):587-603. doi:10.1080/02687030701192034.
  14. Delazer M, Bodner T, Benke T. Rehabilitation of arithmetical text problem solving. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation. 1998;8(4):401-412. doi:10.1080/713755584.
  15. Doesborgh SJ, van de Sandt-Koenderman MW, Dippel DW, van Harskamp F, Koudstaal PG, Visch-Brink EG. Effects of semantic treatment on verbal communication and linguistic processing in aphasia after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2004;35(1):141-146. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000105460.52928.A6.
  16. Domahs F, Bartha-Doering L, Delazer M. Rehabilitation of arithmetic abilities: different intervention strategies for multiplication. Brain and Language. 2003;87(1):165-166. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00252-9.
  17. Domahs F, Zamarian L, Delazer M. Sound arithmetic: auditory cues in the rehabilitation of impaired fact retrieval. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2008;18(2):160-181. doi:10.1080/09602010701505648.
  18. Drew RL, Thompson CK. Model-based semantic treatment for naming deficits in aphasia. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1999;42(4):972-989. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4204.972.
  19. Dunn J, Clare L. Learning face-name associations in early-stage dementia: comparing the effects of errorless learning and effortful processing. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2007;17(6):735-754. doi:10.1080/09602010701218317.
  20. Duval J, Coyette F, Seron X. Rehabilitation of the central executive component of working memory: a re-organisation approach applied to a single case. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2008;18(4):430-460. doi:10.1080/09602010701573950.
  21. Ehlhardt LA, Sohlberg MM, Glang A, Albin R. TEACH-M: a pilot study evaluating an instructional sequence for persons with impaired memory and executive functions. Brain Inj. 2005;19(8):569-583. doi:10.1080/02699050400013550.
  22. Eriksen CW. The flankers task and response competition: a useful tool for investigating a variety of cognitive problems. Visual Cognition. 1995;2(2-3):101-118. doi:10.1080/13506289508401726.
  23. Evald L. Prospective memory rehabilitation using smartphones in patients with TBI: what do participants report? Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2015;25(2):283-297. doi:10.1080/09602011.2014.970557.
  24. Franklin S, Buerk F, Howard D. Generalised improvement in speech production for a subject with reproduction conduction aphasia. Aphasiology. 2002;16(10-11):1087-1114. doi:10.1080/02687030244000491.
  25. Funk J, Finke K, Reinhart S, et al. Effects of feedback-based visual line-orientation discrimination training for visuospatial disorders after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27(2):142-152. doi:10.1177/1545968312457826.
  26. Girelli L, Seron X. Rehabilitation of number processing and calculation skills. Aphasiology. 2001;15(7):695-712. doi:10.1080/02687040143000131.
  27. Girelli L, Delazer M, Semenza C, Denes G. The representation of arithmetical facts: evidence from two rehabilitation studies. Cortex. 1996;32(1):49-66. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(96)80016-5.
  28. Hashimoto N, Frome A. The use of a modified semantic features analysis approach in aphasia. J Commun Disord. 2011;44(4):459-469. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2011.02.004.
  29. Katz RC, Wertz RT. The efficacy of computer-provided reading treatment for chronic aphasic adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997;40(3):493-507. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4003.493.
  30. Kendall DL, Rosenbek JC, Heilman KM, et al. Phoneme-based rehabilitation of anomia in aphasia. Brain Lang. 2008;105(1):1-17. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2007.11.007.
  31. Kerkhoff G. Rehabilitation of visuospatial cognition and visual exploration in neglect: a cross-over study. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 1998;12(1):27-40.
  32. Kiran S, Thompson CK. The role of semantic complexity in treatment of naming deficits: training semantic categories in fluent aphasia by controlling exemplar typicality. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2003;46(3):608-622.
  33. Kiran S, Bassetto G. Evaluating the effectiveness of semantic-based treatment for naming deficits in aphasia: what works? Semin Speech Lang. 2008;29(1):71-82. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1061626.
  34. Kiran S, Johnson L. Semantic complexity in treatment of naming deficits in aphasia: evidence from well-defined categories. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;17(4):389-400. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2008/06-0085).
  35. Kiran S, Viswanathan M. Effect of model-based treatment on oral reading abilities in severe alexia: a case study. J Med Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;16(1):43-59.
  36. Kiran S, Sandberg C, Abbot K. Treatment for lexical retrieval using abstract and concrete words in persons with aphasia: effect of complexity. Aphasiology. 2009;23(7):835-853. doi:10.1080/02687030802588866.
  37. Kiran S, Sandberg C, Sebastian R. Treatment of category generation and retrieval in aphasia: effect of typicality of category items. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011;54(4):1101-1117. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0117).
  38. Kiran S, Thompson CK, Hashimoto N. Training grapheme to phoneme conversion in patients with oral reading and naming deficits: a model-based approach. Aphasiology. 2001;15(9):855-876. doi:10.1080/02687040143000258.
  39. Kiran S. Training phoneme to grapheme conversion for patients with written and oral production deficits: a model-based approach. Aphasiology. 2005;19(1):53-76. doi:10.1080/02687030444000633.
  40. Klingberg T. Training and plasticity of working memory. Trends Cogn Sci. 2010;14(7):317-324. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.002.
  41. Lacey EH, Lott SN, Snider SF, Sperling A, Friedman RB. Multiple oral re-reading treatment for alexia: the parts may be greater than the whole. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2010;20(4):601-623. doi:10.1080/09602011003710993.
  42. Li K, Robertson J, Ramos J, Gella S. Computer-based cognitive retraining for adults with chronic acquired brain injury: a pilot study. Occup Ther Health Care. 2013;27(4):333-344. doi:10.3109/07380577.2013.844877.
  43. Leonard C, Rochon E, Laird L. Treating naming impairments in aphasia: findings from a phonological components analysis treatment. Aphasiology. 2008;22(9):923-947. doi:10.1080/02687030701831474.
  44. Lloyd J, Riley GA, Powell TE. Errorless learning of novel routes through a virtual town in people with acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2009;19(1):98-109. doi:10.1080/09602010802117392.
  45. McGilton KS, Rivera TM, Dawson P. Can we help persons with dementia find their way in a new environment? Aging Ment Health. 2003;7(5):363-371. doi:10.1080/1360786031000150676.
  46. Martini L, Domahs F, Benke T, Delzaer M. Everyday numerical abilities in Alzheimer's disease. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2003;9(6):871-878. doi:10.1017/S1355617703960073.
  47. McDonald A, Haslam C, Yates P, Gurr B, Leeder G, Sayers A. Google Calendar: a new memory aid to compensate for prospective memory deficits following acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21(6):784-807. doi:10.1080/09602011.2011.598405.
  48. McAvinue L, O’Keeffe F, McMackin D, Robertson IH. Impaired sustained attention and error awareness in traumatic brain injury: implications for insight. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2005;15(5):569-587. doi:10.1080/09602010443000119.
  49. Martin-Saez M, Deakins J, Winson R, Watson P, Wilson BA. A 10-year follow up of a paging service for people with memory and planning problems within a healthcare system: how do recent users differ from the original users? Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21(6):769-783. doi:10.1080/09602011.2011.614378.
  50. Powell J, Letson S, Davidoff J, Valentine T, Greenwood R. Enhancement of face recognition learning in patients with brain injury using three cognitive training procedures. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2008;18(2):182-203. doi:10.1080/09602010701419485.
  51. Rapp B. The relationship between treatment outcomes and the underlying cognitive deficit: evidence from the remediation of acquired dysgraphia. Aphasiology. 2005;19(10):994-1008. doi:10.1080/0268703054400029.
  52. Raymer AM, Kohen FP, Saffell D. Computerised training for impairments of word comprehension and retrieval in aphasia. Aphasiology. 2006;20(2-4):257-268. doi:10.1080/02687030500473312.
  53. Raymer AM, Ellsworth TA. Response to contrasting verb retrieval treatments: a case study. Aphasiology. 2002;16(10-11):1031-1045. doi:10.1080/026870401430000609.
  54. Renvall K, Laine M, Martin N. Treatment of anomia with contextual priming: exploration of a modified procedure with additional semantic and phonological tasks. Aphasiology. 2007;21(5):499-527. doi:10.1080/02687030701254248.
  55. Robson J, Marshall J, Chiat S, Pring T. Enhancing communication in jargon aphasia: a small group study of writing therapy. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2001;36(4):471-488. doi:10.1080/13682820110089371.
  56. Rochon E, Leonard C, Burianova H, et al. Neural changes after phonological treatment for anomia: an fMRI study. Brain Lang. 2010;114(3):164-179. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2010.05.005.
  57. Rose M, Douglas J. Treating a semantic word production deficit in aphasia with verbal and gesture methods. Aphasiology. 2008;22(1):20-41. doi:10.1080/02687030600742020.
  58. Salis C, Edwards S. Treatment of written verb and written sentence production in an individual with aphasia: a clinical study. Aphasiology. 2010;24(9):1051-1063. doi:10.1080/02687030903269648.
  59. Salis C. Short-term memory treatment: patterns of learning and generalisation to sentence comprehension in a person with aphasia. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2012;22(3):428-448. doi:10.1080/09602011.2012.656460.
  60. Sandberg C, Kiran S. How justice can affect jury: training abstract words promotes generalisation to concrete words in patients with aphasia. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2014;24(5):738-769. doi:10.1080/09602011.2014.899504.
  61. Stadie N, Schröder A, Postler J. Unambiguous generalization effects after treatment of non-canonical sentence production in German agrammatism. Brain Lang. 2008;104(3):211-229. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2007.08.006.
  62. Stanczak L, Walters G, Caplan D. Typicality-based learning and generalisation in aphasia: two case studies of anomia treatment. Aphasiology. 2006;20(2-4):374-383. doi:10.1080/02687030600587631.
  63. Tessier C, Weill-Chounlamountry A, Michelot N, Pradat-Diehl P. Rehabilitation of word deafness due to auditory analysis disorder. Brain Inj. 2007;21(11):1165-1174. doi:10.1080/02699050701559186.
  64. Tsapkini K, Hills AE. Spelling intervention in post-stroke aphasia and primary progressive aphasia. Behav Neurol. 2013;26(1-2):55-66. doi:10.3233/BEN-2012-110240.
  65. Tzuriel D, Egozi G. Gender differences in spatial ability of young children: the effects of training and processing strategies. Child Dev. 2010;81(5):1417-1430. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01482.x.
  66. Vallat-Azouvi C, Pradat-Diehl P, Azouvi P. Rehabilitation of the central executive of working memory after severe traumatic brain injury: two single-case studies. Brain Inj. 2009;23(6):585-594. doi:10.1080/02699050902970711.
  67. Weinrich M, Boser KI, McCall D, Bishop V. Training agrammatic subjects on passive sentences: implications for syntactic deficit theories. Brain Lang. 2001;76(1):45-61. doi:10.1006/brin.2000.2421.
  68. Westerberg H, Jacobaeus H, Hirvikoski T, et al. Computerized working memory training after stroke—a pilot study. Brain Inj. 2007;21(1):21-29. doi:10.1080/02699050601148726.
  69. Whetstone T. The representation of arithmetic facts in memory: results from retraining a brain-damaged patient. Brain Cogn. 1998;36(3):290-309. doi:10.1006/brcg.1998.0997.
  70. Zaunmüller L, Domahs F, Dressel K, et al. Rehabilitation of arithmetic fact retrieval via extensive practice: a combined fMRI and behavioural case-study. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2009;19(3):422-443. doi:10.1080/09602010802296378.



Q: Is my clinician account the same as my client’s account?

A: No, these are two separate accounts that are linked to each other. You’ll create your own clinician account, and then “Add Clients” in the app. When you are adding a new client to your account, you’ll be asked to create a username and password for that client. Give that username and password to your client, and then they can go home, download Constant Therapy onto their own device, and sign in with the login you provided to them. Your patient’s account will be linked to your account, but they practice on their own device.

Q: How do I add an existing Constant Therapy user to my list of patients?

A: To add an existing user to your list of patients, click on the “Add” button near the top of your screen. This will cause a window with two options to open up. Click on the second option, which says, “Add existing client.” Then, enter your patient’s email and username to add them to your list of clients. Another way to link to an existing user is through their account. Your client logs into his/her account and tap Settings> Manage clinicians> Enter your username and password> Finish. Once you are linked, you will have access to everything in your client’s account including their history.

Q: How do I access my client’s reports to review from inside the app?

A: Clinicians can view reports in-app or through the Constant Therapy website.

  • From inside the app: Select the client’s name from the top drop-down menu called “My Clients.” Click on the Summary tab found at the bottom left. To specify a date range, click on the black bar under the client’s name. The calendar shows squares (work done at home) and circles (work done in clinic). Tap on specific exercises to view performance history. To view more details, click on the Reports tab found on the bottom right. For iOS devices, this tab has a pop-up that shows an email-friendly version that can be used for daily or progress notes. For Android or Kindle users, that report can be obtained by logging in through the Constant Therapy website. This tab shows the client’s accuracy and latency scores (close the pop-up for iOS users to view this). Click on a score to see more data about that particular exercise
  • From any browser: Go to the Constant Therapy home page and click My Account.  Enter your credentials. Select the client you wish to review and a summary page will open.  To dive deeper into the performance in each area, click on Review Performance. You can view the skill area as a whole or each individual exercise. At the top right of the Performance page, you have the option to get a full text-based report for printing .
Q: I am currently working with a patient in a clinical setting, but I want my patient to work on the exercises at home as well. How do I set up their account so they are able to do this?

A: Your patient will need his or her own device to do this. First, on your own account and device, click on “Add Client.” At that point, you’ll be asked to create a username and password for your client. Give that username and password to your client, and then they can go home, download Constant Therapy onto their own device and sign in with the login credentials you provided to them (or they can download onto their device and sign in in your office if this is more convenient). After they have logged in, a window will open up on their screen that will ask them to confirm their email. Ask them to enter their personal email address into this window. They will also be asked to “accept” our user agreement. After this step, they can begin using Constant Therapy at home and their 14-day free trial will begin.

Q: How do I discharge a patient from my Constant Therapy account? Does it shut down their home access?

A: This process will NOT impact the patient’s data or access if he/she is a subscriber. To “discharge” a patient from your account, select the patient account and click on the “remove” icon.

Get Started