Test–Retest Reliability of Microlinguistic Information Derived From Spoken Discourse in Persons With Chronic Aphasia.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to characterize test–retest reliability of discourse measures across a battery of common tasks in individuals with apha- sia and prospectively matched adults without brain damage. Method: We collected spoken discourse during five monologue tasks at two timepoin...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research Vol. 66; no. 7; pp. 2316 - 2346 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Jul2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=164881402&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 164881402 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 10924388 1SM jtl: Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research issn: 10924388 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jul2023 vid: 66 iid: 7 pid: 42 pub: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association artinfo: ui: 164881402 10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00266 ppf: 2316 ppct: 30 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 2.6MB tig: atl: Test–Retest Reliability of Microlinguistic Information Derived From Spoken Discourse in Persons With Chronic Aphasia. aug: au: Stark, Brielle C. Alexander, Julianne M. Hittson, Anne Doub, Ashleigh Igleheart, Madison Streander, Taylor Jewell, Emily affil: Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Indiana University Bloomington. Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Champaign. su: Analysis of variance Chronic diseases Linguistics Task performance Discourse analysis Statistical power analysis Statistics Nonparametric statistics Statistical reliability Research evaluation Confidence intervals Effect sizes (Statistics) Speech evaluation Aphasia Severity of illness index Neuropsychological tests Inter-observer reliability Repeated measures design Descriptive statistics Intraclass correlation Brain injuries Data analysis software Data analysis Video recording Disease complications sug: subj: Analysis of variance Chronic diseases Linguistics Task performance Discourse analysis Statistical power analysis Statistics Nonparametric statistics Statistical reliability Research evaluation Confidence intervals Effect sizes (Statistics) Speech evaluation Aphasia Severity of illness index Neuropsychological tests Inter-observer reliability Repeated measures design Descriptive statistics Intraclass correlation Brain injuries Data analysis software Data analysis Video recording Disease complications ab: Purpose: The purpose of this study was to characterize test–retest reliability of discourse measures across a battery of common tasks in individuals with apha- sia 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 reli- ability 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 rela- tionship 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 evalu- ating 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 spe- cific 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. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|