Search

Purpose: The aim of this study was to advance the use of structured, monologic discourse analysis by validating an automated scoring procedure for core lexicon (CoreLex) using transcripts. Method: Forty-nine transcripts from persons with aphasia and 48 transcripts from persons with no brain injury were retrieved from the AphasiaBank database. Five structured monologic discourse tasks were scored manually by trained scorers and via automation using a newly developed CLAN command based upon previously published lists for CoreLex. Point-to-point (or word-by-word) accuracy and reliability of the two methods were calculated. Scoring discrepancies were examined to identify errors. Time estimates for each method were calculated to determine if automated scoring improved efficiency. Results: Intraclass correlation coefficients for the tasks ranged from .998 to .978, indicating excellent intermethod reliability. Automated scoring using CLAN represented a significant time savings for an experienced CLAN user and for inexperienced CLAN users following step-by-step instructions. Conclusions: Automated scoring of CoreLex is a valid and reliable alternative to the current gold standard of manually scoring CoreLex from transcribed monologic discourse samples. The downstream time saving of this automated analysis may allow for more efficient and broader utilization of this discourse measure in aphasia research. To further encourage the use of this method, go to https://aphasia.talkbank.org/discourse/CoreLexicon/ for materials and the step-by-step instructions utilized in this project. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20399304

Purpose: It is inherently important to capture comprehensive information about language from speakers with aphasia. One such way to do this is to evaluate language during spoken discourse, which is language beyond a single simple clause used for a specific purpose. While the trend in aphasiology has been to capture performance during isolated language tasks, such as confrontation naming, there is a demonstrated need and benefit to collecting language information from tasks that resemble a person’s everyday communication ability. As a result, there has been an increase in discourse analysis research over time. However, despite clinicians’ and researchers’ desire to analyze spoken discourse, they are faced with critical barriers, such as limited time and tools for elicitation and analysis. Method: Here, we employ a narrative review and synthesis methodology to identify transcription-less methods for analyzing aphasic discourse, which has been tapped as a particularly useful way to combat limited time and tools because it does not require the time-intensive transcription. Results: In addition to summarizing the tools and their uses, we discuss on what populations the tool was evaluated, what is known about the tools’ psychometric properties (validity, reliability), and the extent to which implementation of the tool in clinical settings has been evaluated. Conclusion: The goal of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the state of transcription-less tools for aphasic discourse analysis and identify next steps to facilitate increased implementation of discourse analysis in clinical and research settings.

Purpose Macrostructural narrative analyses are important clinical measures, revealing age-related declines and disorder-related impairments in the accuracy, completeness, logical sequencing, and organization of content. The current study aims to provide preliminary data on typical aging and psychometric evidence supporting multilevel Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar (MSSG) analyses that capture these aspects of narratives. Method Transcripts of Cinderella narratives for 92 healthy control participants stratified across four age brackets from the online database AphasiaBank were coded by Richardson and Dalton (2016) for main concept (MC) analysis. In the current study, MSSG analyses were completed for (a) logical sequencing, independently and in combination with MC accuracy and completeness (MC + sequencing), and (b) story grammar organization (i.e., inclusion of episodic components and complexity of episodes). Interrater agreement (99%–100%) revealed highly reliable scoring. Results Descriptive statistics for the typically aging sample are presented for sequencing, MC + sequencing, total episodic components, and episodic complexity. Scores for participants over 60 years of age were lower (poorer) than scores for those 20–59 years of age, supporting the construct validity of score use for identifying age-related declines in performance. Conclusions This study's novel MSSG analyses of narrative production efficiently assess the logical sequencing and story grammar organization of content in healthy controls. Preliminary reliability and validity evidence support the use of all scores to measure age-related changes in narrative macrostructure. Data from this typically aging sample provide a foundation for future research and clinical assessment aimed at quantifying narrative deficits in adults with communication disorders. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12683495

This chapter is written for the qualified neurologist or related professional working with persons who have had a stroke or other sudden brain injury. It is critical that the presence of aphasia is detected, no matter how mild the presentation, and to support that assertion, this chapter highlights the plight of persons with latent aphasia. At the individual level, the impact of aphasia is devastating, with overwhelming evidence that aphasia negatively impacts psychosocial outcomes. At the global level, sensitive detection and accurate diagnosis of aphasia are critical for accurate characterization and quantification of the global burden of aphasia. The word "LANGUAGE" is leveraged as an acronym to create a useful and memorable checklist to guide navigation of aphasia screening and assessment: it begins with the definition of language (L), followed by the definition and diagnostic criteria for aphasia (A). Then language abilities and characteristics to be considered in assessment are presented: naming (N); grammar and syntax (G); unintelligible words, jargon, and paraphasias (U); auditory comprehension and repetition (A); graphemic abilities-reading and writing (G); and everyday communication and discourse (E). Recommendations for improving procedural adherence are provided, and a list of potential brief assessment measures are introduced.

Measurement of communication ability at the discourse level holds promise for predicting how well persons with stable (e.g., stroke-induced), or progressive aphasia navigate everyday communicative interactions. However, barriers to the clinical utilization of discourse measures have persisted. Recent advancements in the standardization of elicitation protocols and the existence of large databases for development of normative references have begun to address some of these barriers. Still, time remains a consistently reported barrier by clinicians. Non-transcription based discourse measurement would reduce the time required for discourse analysis, making clinical utilization a reality. The purpose of this article is to present evidence regarding discourse measures (main concept analysis, core lexicon, and derived efficiency scores) that are well suited to non-transcription based analysis. Combined with previous research, our results suggest that these measures are sensitive to changes following stroke or neurodegenerative disease. Given the evidence, further research specifically assessing the reliability of these measures in clinical implementation is warranted.

Purpose The purposes of this study are to provide clinicians and researchers with introductory psychometric data for the main concept analysis (MCA), a measure of discourse informativeness, and specifically, to provide descriptive and comparative statistical information about the performance of a large sample of persons not brain injured (PNBIs) and persons with aphasia (PWAs) on AphasiaBank discourse tasks. Method Transcripts of 5 semi-spontaneous discourse tasks were retrieved from the AphasiaBank database and scored according to detailed checklists and scoring procedures. Transcripts from 145 PNBIs and 238 PWAs were scored; descriptive statistics, median tests, and effect sizes are reported. Results PWAs demonstrated overall lower informativeness scores and more frequent production of statements that were inaccurate and/or incomplete. Differences between PNBIs and PWAs were observed for all main concept measures and stories. Comparisons of PNBIs and aphasia subtypes revealed significant differences for all groups, although the pattern of differences and strength of effect sizes varied by group and discourse task. Conclusions These results may improve the investigative and clinical utility of the MCA by providing descriptive and comparative information for PNBIs and PWAs for standardized discourse tasks that can be reliably scored. The results indicate that the MCA is sensitive to differences in discourse as a result of aphasia. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.7485647

We investigated spectral resting-state EEG in persons with chronic stroke-induced aphasia to determine its reliability, sensitivity, and relationship to functional behaviors. Resting-state EEG has not yet been characterized in this population and was selected given the demonstrated potential of resting-state investigations using other neuroimaging techniques to guide clinical decision-making. Controls and persons with chronic stroke-induced aphasia completed two EEG recording sessions, separated by approximately 1 month, as well as behavioral assessments of language, sensorimotor, and cognitive domains. Power in the classic frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha, and beta) was examined via spectral analysis of resting-state EEG data. Results suggest that power in the theta, alpha, and beta bands is reliable for use as a repeated measure. Significantly greater theta and lower beta power was observed in persons with aphasia (PWAs) than controls. Finally, in PWAs theta power negatively correlated with performance on a discourse informativeness measure, while alpha and beta power positively correlated with performance on the same measure. This indicates that spectral rsEEG slowing observed in PWAs in the chronic stage is pathological and suggests a possible avenue for directly altering brain activation to improve behavioral function. Taken together, these results suggest that spectral resting-state EEG holds promise for sensitive measurement of functioning and change in persons with chronic aphasia. Future studies investigating the utility of these measures as biomarkers of frank or latent aphasic deficits and treatment response in chronic stroke-induced aphasia are warranted.

BACKGROUND: Proposition analysis of the discourse of persons with aphasia has a long history, yielding important advancements in our understanding of communication impairments in this population. Recently, discourse measures have been considered primary outcome measures, and multiple calls have been made for improved psychometric properties of discourse measures. AIMS: To advance the use of discourse analysis in persons with aphasia by providing Main Concept Analysis checklists and descriptive statistics for healthy control performance on the analysis for the Cat in the Tree and Refused Umbrella narrative tasks utilized in the AphasiaBank database protocol. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Ninety-two control transcripts, stratified into four age groups (20–39 years; 40–59; 60–79; 80+), were downloaded from the AphasiaBank database. Relevant concepts were identified, and those spoken by at least one-third of the control sample were considered to be a main concept. A multi-level coding system was used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the main concepts produced by control speakers. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Main concept checklists for two discourse tasks are provided. Descriptive statistics are reported and examined to assist readers with evaluation of the normative data. CONCLUSIONS: These checklists provide clinicians and researchers with a tool to reliably assess the discourse of persons with aphasia. They also help address the gap in available psychometric data with which to compare persons with aphasia to healthy controls.

Core Lexicon (CoreLex) is a relatively new approach assessing lexical use in discourse. CoreLex examines the specific lexical items used to tell a story, or how typical lexical items are compared with a normative sample. This method has great potential for clinical utilization because CoreLex measures are fast, easy to administer, and correlate with microlinguistic and macrolinguistic discourse measures. The purpose of this article is to provide clinicians with a centralized resource for currently available CoreLex checklists, including information regarding development, norms, and guidelines for use.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to describe the linguistic environment of phonological paraphasias in 3 variants of primary progressive aphasia (semantic, logopenic, and nonfluent) and to describe the profiles of paraphasia production for each of these variants. Method Discourse samples of 26 individuals diagnosed with primary progressive aphasia were investigated for phonological paraphasias using the criteria established for the Philadelphia Naming Test (Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, 2013). Phonological paraphasias were coded for paraphasia type, part of speech of the target word, target word frequency, type of segment in error, word position of consonant errors, type of error, and degree of change in consonant errors. Results Eighteen individuals across the 3 variants produced phonological paraphasias. Most paraphasias were nonword, followed by formal, and then mixed, with errors primarily occurring on nouns and verbs, with relatively few on function words. Most errors were substitutions, followed by addition and deletion errors, and few sequencing errors. Errors were evenly distributed across vowels, consonant singletons, and clusters, with more errors occurring in initial and medial positions of words than in the final position of words. Most consonant errors consisted of only a single-feature change, with few 2- or 3-feature changes. Importantly, paraphasia productions by variant differed from these aggregate results, with unique production patterns for each variant. Conclusions These results suggest that a system where paraphasias are coded as present versus absent may be insufficient to adequately distinguish between the 3 subtypes of PPA. The 3 variants demonstrate patterns that may be used to improve phenotyping and diagnostic sensitivity. These results should be integrated with recent findings on phonological processing and speech rate. Future research should attempt to replicate these results in a larger sample of participants with longer speech samples and varied elicitation tasks. Supplemental Materials https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.5558107

Background: Semi-spontaneous speech production tasks are commonly elicited to assess discourse ability. When knowledge of a topic, story, or event is shared, it is possible to gauge the informativeness of discourse by evaluating how accurately and completely an individual produces the concepts considered to be essential to the shared topic. This analysis, main concept analysis (MCA), quantifies the degree to which speakers are able to communicate the overall gist of an event. Though MCA is an easy-to-perform, informative, and reliable measure of discourse adequacy, its widespread adoption depends on the development of standardisation and normative reference. Given the large collection of control discourse transcripts available on the AphasiaBank database, it is possible to generate main concept lists based upon a large sample of control speakers and to characterise their performance to establish preliminary normative reference.Aims: The first aim of this study was to develop main concept checklists drawn ...

Purpose This study examined discourse characteristics of individuals with aphasia who scored at or above the 93.8 cutoff on the Aphasia Quotient subtests of the Western Aphasia Battery–Revised (WAB-R; Kertesz, 2007). They were compared with participants without aphasia and those with anomic aphasia. Method Participants were from the AphasiaBank database and included 28 participants who were not aphasic by WAB-R score (NABW), 92 participants with anomic aphasia, and 177 controls. Cinderella narratives were analyzed using the Computerized Language Analysis programs (MacWhinney, 2000). Outcome measures were words per minute, percent word errors, lexical diversity using the moving average type–token ratio (Covington, 2007b), main concept production, number of utterances, mean length of utterance, and proposition density. Results Results showed that the NABW group was significantly different from the controls on all measures except MLU and proposition density. These individuals were compared to participants without aphasia and those with anomic aphasia. Conclusion Individuals with aphasia who score above the WAB-R Aphasia Quotient cutoff demonstrate discourse impairments that warrant both treatment and special attention in the research literature.

PurposeIn aphasia treatment literature, scarce attention is paid to factors that may reduce a study's validity, including adherence to assessment and treatment procedures (i.e., fidelity). Although guidelines have been established for evaluating and reporting treatment fidelity, none exist for assessment fidelity.MethodWe reviewed treatment fidelity guidelines and related literature to identify assessment fidelity components. We then examined 88 aphasia treatment studies published between 2010 and 2015 and report the frequency with which researchers provide information regarding the following assessment fidelity components: assessment instruments, assessor qualifications, assessor or rater training, assessment delivery, assessor or rater reliability, and assessor blinding.ResultsWe found that 4.5% of studies reported information regarding assessment instruments, 35.2% reported information regarding assessor qualifications, 6.85% reported information regarding assessor or rater training, 37.5% reported information regarding assessor or rater reliability, 27.3% reported on assessor blinding, and no studies reported information regarding assessment delivery.ConclusionsThere is a paucity of assessment fidelity information reported in aphasia treatment research. The authors propose a set of guidelines to ensure readers will be able to evaluate assessment fidelity, and thus study validity.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between picture naming performance and the ability to communicate the gist, or essential elements, of a story. We also sought to determine if this relationship varied according to Western Aphasia Battery–Revised (WAB-R; Kertesz, 2007) aphasia subtype.MethodDemographic information, test scores, and transcripts of 258 individuals with aphasia completing 3 narrative tasks were retrieved from the AphasiaBank database. Narratives were subjected to a main concept analysis to determine gist production. A correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between naming scores and main concept production for the whole group of persons with aphasia and for WAB-R subtypes separately.ResultsWe found strong correlations between naming test scores and narrative gist production for the large sample of persons with aphasia. However, the strength of the correlations varied by WAB-R subtype.ConclusionsPicture naming may accurately predict gist production for individuals with Broca's and Wernicke's aphasia, but not for other WAB-R subtypes. Given the current reprioritization of outcome measurement, picture naming may not be an appropriate surrogate measure for functional communication for all persons with aphasia.Supplemental Materialshttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.5851848

Purpose We sought to identify the core lexicon of a picture-description task using transcripts from the AphasiaBank database and to determine differences in core-lexicon usage between control speakers and persons with aphasia (PWAs). We also investigated the relationship between core lexicon and an established discourse measure, main-concept analysis. Method A core lexicon was developed by identifying lemmas produced by 92 control speakers. Transcripts were scored—165 control transcripts and 238 PWA transcripts—using the core lexicon and a recently developed main-concept list. Median tests examined differences between controls, PWAs, and aphasia subtypes. Spearman's correlations assessed the relationship between core-lexicon and main-concept performance. Results A 24-item core lexicon was identified. Significant differences were found between control speakers and PWAs, and between aphasia subtypes, for core-lexicon and main-concept scores. Core-lexicon and main-concept performance was significantly and positively correlated for all groups. Conclusions We report the development of a core lexicon, differences in core-lexicon usage between speakers, and the relationship between core-lexicon and main-concept scores. Research is needed to determine the clinical utility and psychometric properties of these discourse measures and their potential contribution to multilevel discourse analysis of functional communication.