| 1 |
An aphasia research agenda – a consensus statement from the collaboration of aphasia trialists
|
|
|
|
In: Research outputs 2014 to 2021 (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Creating a theoretical framework to underpin discourse assessment and intervention in aphasia
|
|
|
|
In: Research outputs 2014 to 2021 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Treatment for improving discourse in aphasia: A systematic review and synthesis of the evidence base
|
|
|
|
In: Research outputs 2014 to 2021 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes: a systematic scoping review and analysis using the TIDieR checklist for reporting interventions ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes: a systematic scoping review and analysis using the TIDieR checklist for reporting interventions ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Development of a self-management intervention for stroke survivors with aphasia using co-production and behaviour change theory: An outline of methods and processes
|
|
|
|
In: PLoS One (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Treatment fidelity of technology-enhanced reading therapy (CommuniCATE) for people with aphasia
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Background Treatment fidelity (TF), that is, the degree to which the treatment delivery has adhered to protocol, is an important aspect of establishing treatment validity and reliability. Research has shown that establishing TF is only done in a small percentage of aphasia treatment studies. Aims This project supports the work of the CommuniCATE study, which explored the benefits of technology-enhanced aphasia therapy on participants’ reading, writing, speech and conversation skills. It examines the TF of the Reading strand of the CommuniCATE project by assessing whether the therapy adhered to the protocol. The following research questions were asked: Does treatment delivery adhere to treatment protocol? Does the degree of TF vary according to the person delivering the therapy (i.e. student therapist or qualified therapist)? Does the degree of TF vary over time (early treatment sessions compared with later treatment sessions)? Was the checklist tool reliable? Methods & Procedures This study assessed the fidelity of 38 retrospective video recordings of therapy. It used a checklist measure of criteria to which the delivery of the sessions should adhere, and against which the sessions were rated. Participants were the people with aphasia receiving therapy, the students and qualified speech and language therapists delivering therapy, and the independent raters assessing the sessions. A sample of sessions was randomly chosen, including sessions delivered by qualified therapists and by students, and sessions from different time points in the treatment process. The fidelity was rated by the first author, and the fidelity rating calculated as a percentage. Comparisons in fidelity scores for the different variables were drawn using Mann–Whitney tests. The reliability of the checklist was assessed through inter and intra-rater reliability testing, and the results were analysed using Kappa statistics. Outcomes & Results High fidelity was found across all therapy conditions with a mean score of 98.2%. Fidelity scores were not affected by the administrator of therapy; sessions delivered by qualified and student therapists were rated equally highly. There was a small but significant effect of time, with later treatment sessions scoring more highly than earlier sessions. However, scores across both periods > 90%. Inter-rater reliability found a high percentage agreement of 93.3% and a Poor Kappa agreement level. Intra-rater agreement found a high percentage agreement of 97.3% and a Fair Kappa agreement level. Conclusions & Implications The CommuniCATE reading therapy was implemented as per the protocol across time points, and withstood delegation to students. The high fidelity and good reliability scores have positive implications for the study's validity and reliability, and for the study's replication.
|
|
URL: http://repository.essex.ac.uk/30730/
https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12637
http://repository.essex.ac.uk/30730/1/Bacon%20Communicate%20Reading%20fidelity%202021.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Delivering group support for people with aphasia in a virtual world: experiences of service providers.
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Preliminary outcomes from a pilot study of personalised online supported conversation for participation intervention for people with Aphasia
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Creating a Theoretical Framework to Underpin Discourse Assessment and Intervention in Aphasia
|
|
|
|
In: Brain Sci (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Assessing Parent Behaviours in Parent–Child Interactions with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Infants Aged 0–3 Years: A Systematic Review
|
|
|
|
In: J Clin Med (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 12 |
Assessing Parent-Child Interaction in Infant Deafness
|
|
|
|
In: Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 13 |
An aphasia research agenda - a consensus statement from the collaboration of aphasia trialists.
|
|
|
|
In: Ali, Myzoon Soroli, Efstathia Jesus, Luis M. T. Cruice, Madeline Isaksen, Jytte Visch-Brink, Evy Grohmann, Kleanthes K. Jagoe, C. Kukkonen, Tarja Varlokosta, Spyridoula Hernández Sacristán, Carlos Rosell Clari, Vicent Palmer, Rebecca Martinez Ferreiro, Silvia Godecke, Erin Wallace, Sarah J. McMenamin, Ruth Copland, David Breitenstein, Caterina Bowen, Audrey Laska, Ann-Charlotte Hilari, Katerina Brady, Marian C. 2021 An aphasia research agenda - a consensus statement from the collaboration of aphasia trialists. Aphasiology 1 21 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 14 |
UK speech and language therapists' views and reported practices of discourse analysis in aphasia rehabilitation
|
|
|
|
In: Research outputs 2014 to 2021 (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
Establishing consensus on a definition of aphasia: an e-Delphi study of international aphasia researchers
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 16 |
A core outcome set for aphasia treatment research: The ROMA consensus statement
|
|
|
|
In: Research outputs 2014 to 2021 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 17 |
Technology‐enhanced reading therapy for people with aphasia: findings from a quasi‐randomized waitlist controlled study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
Technology-enhanced writing therapy for people with aphasia: results of a quasi-randomized waitlist controlled study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 19 |
Increasing the intensity and comprehensiveness of aphasia services: identification of key factors influencing implementation across six countries
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 20 |
Reporting interventions in communication partner training: a critical review and narrative synthesis of the literature
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
