東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Self-reported and partner-reported f...

Messamer, Paula J.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Self-reported and partner-reported functional communication and their relation to language and non-verbal cognition in mild to moderate aphasia.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Self-reported and partner-reported functional communication and their relation to language and non-verbal cognition in mild to moderate aphasia./
Author:	Messamer, Paula J.
Description:	136 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International77-10B(E).
Subject:	Speech therapy. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10108706
ISBN:	9781339720418

Self-reported and partner-reported functional communication and their relation to language and non-verbal cognition in mild to moderate aphasia.
Messamer, Paula J.

Self-reported and partner-reported functional communication and their relation to language and non-verbal cognition in mild to moderate aphasia. - 136 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Colorado at Boulder, 2016.

Purpose: Non-verbal cognition and language functions were examined in adult stroke survivors with aphasia. The specific purpose of the study was twofold: 1) to examine the relationship between self-reported outcomes from people with aphasia (PwA), measures of non-verbal cognition (Delis-Kaplan Executive Function Systems Test (D-KEFS), Delis, Kaplan, & Kramer, 2001) and measures of language (Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R), Kertesz, 2007; Boston Naming Test Second Edition (BNT-2), Kaplan, Goodglass, & Weintraub, 2001) and 2) to examine these same relationships using partner-reported outcomes for that same group of PwA. This study used the Aphasia Communication Outcome Measure (ACOM, Doyle et al., 2013) to gather both self-reported ACOM data and partner-reported ACOM data (ratings of the person with aphasia's communication made by a regular conversation partner).

ISBN: 9781339720418Subjects--Topical Terms:

520446
Speech therapy.

Self-reported and partner-reported functional communication and their relation to language and non-verbal cognition in mild to moderate aphasia.
LDR:04395nmm a2200337 4500 001 2114974
005 20161114124731.5
008 180830s2016 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781339720418
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10108706
035 $a AAI10108706
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Messamer, Paula J. $3 3276595
245 1 0 $a Self-reported and partner-reported functional communication and their relation to language and non-verbal cognition in mild to moderate aphasia.
300 $a 136 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: Gail Ramsberger.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Colorado at Boulder, 2016.
520 $a Purpose: Non-verbal cognition and language functions were examined in adult stroke survivors with aphasia. The specific purpose of the study was twofold: 1) to examine the relationship between self-reported outcomes from people with aphasia (PwA), measures of non-verbal cognition (Delis-Kaplan Executive Function Systems Test (D-KEFS), Delis, Kaplan, & Kramer, 2001) and measures of language (Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R), Kertesz, 2007; Boston Naming Test Second Edition (BNT-2), Kaplan, Goodglass, & Weintraub, 2001) and 2) to examine these same relationships using partner-reported outcomes for that same group of PwA. This study used the Aphasia Communication Outcome Measure (ACOM, Doyle et al., 2013) to gather both self-reported ACOM data and partner-reported ACOM data (ratings of the person with aphasia's communication made by a regular conversation partner).
520 $a Method: Seventeen participants with aphasia underwent examination with an extensive test battery including measures of functional communication, non-verbal cognition, and language impairment. In addition, 16 of their regular communication partners rated functional communication performance.
520 $a Results: Self-reported functional communication is strongly related to the number of errors committed on the D-KEFS design fluency test (r = .81, p = .001). Furthermore, a modified form of the D-KEFS design fluency test (in which the examinee is allowed unlimited time) shows that the proportion of errors contributes significantly to a two- predictor linear regression model. These two predictors account for 66% of the variance in self-reported functional communication ratings. These results suggest that non-verbal cognition for people with mild to moderate aphasia may serve an important role in functional communication. By contrast, self-reported functional communication was uncorrelated with aphasia severity (r = .04, p = .88), naming performance on either the WAB-R (r=.059, p=.823) or the BNT-2 (r=.097, p=.713), and category fluency (r=.086, p=.741). Partner-reported functional communication was highly correlated to the naming subtest on Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R) scores (r=.71, p=.02) and to performance on the Boston Naming Test (BNT-2; r=.56, p=.026).
520 $a Partner-reported functional communication was also strongly predicted based on the number of animals named during the category fluency task on the WAB-R (r=.782, p=.000). A linear regression model including WAB-R category fluency accounted for 61.1% of the variance in partner-reported ratings. A second linear regression adding naming as a predictor was not significant (Fchange = 2.18, p=.163). By contrast, none of the non-verbal cognition measures were useful predictors of partner-reported functional communication. These results suggest that aphasia severity serves an important role in partner ratings of functional communication whereas non-verbal cognition does not.
520 $a Taken together, these results suggest that PwA and their partners rely on different aspects of communication when judging functional communication.
520 $a Further work to explore the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and to identify factors that contribute to self-reported functional communication is needed. The discussion addresses the appropriateness of using PRO measures in aphasia and the use of surrogate reports.
590 $a School code: 0051.
650 4 $a Speech therapy. $3 520446
650 4 $a Neurosciences. $3 588700
690 $a 0460
690 $a 0317
710 2 $a University of Colorado at Boulder. $b Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences. $3 1023982
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 77-10B(E).
790 $a 0051
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2016
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10108706