RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to characterize test-retest reliability of discourse measures across a battery of common tasks in individuals with aphasia and prospectively matched adults without brain damage. METHOD: We collected spoken discourse during five monologue tasks at two timepoints (test and retest; within 2 weeks apart) in an aphasia group (n = 23) and a peer group with no brain damage (n = 24). We evaluated test-retest reliability for percentage of correct information units, correct information units per minute, mean length of utterance, verbs per utterance, noun/verb ratio, open/closed class word ratio, tokens, sample duration (seconds), propositional idea density, type-token ratio, and words per minute. We explored reliability's relationship with sample length and aphasia severity. RESULTS: Rater reliability was excellent. Across tasks, both groups demonstrated discourse measures with poor, moderate, and good reliability, with the aphasia group having measures demonstrating excellent test-retest reliability. When evaluating measures within each task, test-retest reliability again ranged from poor to excellent for both groups. Across groups and task, measures that appeared most reliable appeared to reflect lexical, informativeness, or fluency information. Sample length and aphasia severity impacted reliability, and this differed across and by task. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several discourse measures that were reliable across and within tasks. Test-retest statistics are intimately linked to the specific sample, emphasizing the importance of multiple baseline studies. Task itself should be considered an important variable, and it should not be assumed that discourse measures found to be reliable across several tasks (averaged) are likewise reliable for a single task. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.23298032.
Asunto(s)
Afasia , Lesiones Encefálicas , Adulto , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Lenguaje , Pruebas del LenguajeRESUMEN
Purpose The use of technology (e.g., telehealth) in clinical settings has rapidly increased, and its use in research settings continues to grow. The aim of this report is to present one potential solution to a clinical issue that of virtual and remote assessment for the purposes of spoken language research in persons with aphasia (PWA). To do so, we report detailed methods for conducting a multitimepoint (test-retest) virtual paradigm, assessing lifestyle, physiological, cognitive, and linguistic factors in persons with and without aphasia. Method Procedures for virtual assessment are detailed in a sample of adults with no brain damage (N = 24) and PWA (N = 25) on a test-retest paradigm (data collection approximately 10 ± 3 days apart). This report provides practical information about pre-assessment (e.g., recruitment, scheduling), assessment (e.g., aphasia-friendly consent presentation, investigator fidelity), and postassessment (e.g., data storage, quality check) procedures for human behavior research using a virtual platform. Results Preliminary study data are provided, indicating high retention rates, high rates of data acquisition, and feasibility. Common technological troubles and solutions are discussed, and solutions are offered. The results suggest that our pre-assessment, assessment, and postassessment procedures contributed to the success of our study. Conclusions We provide a practical methodology for conducting a multitimepoint study, with considerations for PWA, adding to the body of research on telehealth in clinical populations. Future studies should continue to evaluate telemethodology, which may be core for diversifying studies, improving study retention, and enrolling larger sample sizes. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14608101.