File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: An integrative analysis of spontaneous storytelling discourse in aphasia: Relationship with listeners’ rating and prediction of severity and fluency status of aphasia

TitleAn integrative analysis of spontaneous storytelling discourse in aphasia: Relationship with listeners’ rating and prediction of severity and fluency status of aphasia
Authors
Issue Date2018
Citation
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2018, v. 27, n. 4, p. 1491-1505 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose: This study investigated which of the three analytic approaches of oral discourse, including linguistically based measures, proposition-based measures, and story grammar, best correlated with aphasia severity and with naïve listeners’ ratings on aphasic productions. The predictive power of these analytic approaches to aphasia severity and fluency status of people with aphasia (PWA) was examined. Finally, which approach best discriminated fluent versus nonfluent PWA was determined. Method: Audio files and orthographic transcriptions of the storytelling task “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” from 68 PWA and 68 controls were extracted from the Cantonese AphasiaBank. Each transcript was analyzed using these 3 systems. Results: The linguistic approach of discourse analysis best correlated with aphasia severity and naïve listeners’ subjective ratings. Although both linguistically based and proposition-based measures significantly predicted aphasia severity, a subset of linguistic measures focusing on the quantity and efficiency of production were particularly useful for clinical estimation of the fluency status of aphasia. Conclusions: The linguistically based measures appeared to be the most clinically effective and powerful in reflecting PWA’s performance of spoken discourse.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/307052
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 2.3
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.923
PubMed Central ID
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKong, Anthony Pak Hin-
dc.contributor.authorWong, Cherie Wan Yin-
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-03T06:21:50Z-
dc.date.available2021-11-03T06:21:50Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2018, v. 27, n. 4, p. 1491-1505-
dc.identifier.issn1058-0360-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/307052-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: This study investigated which of the three analytic approaches of oral discourse, including linguistically based measures, proposition-based measures, and story grammar, best correlated with aphasia severity and with naïve listeners’ ratings on aphasic productions. The predictive power of these analytic approaches to aphasia severity and fluency status of people with aphasia (PWA) was examined. Finally, which approach best discriminated fluent versus nonfluent PWA was determined. Method: Audio files and orthographic transcriptions of the storytelling task “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” from 68 PWA and 68 controls were extracted from the Cantonese AphasiaBank. Each transcript was analyzed using these 3 systems. Results: The linguistic approach of discourse analysis best correlated with aphasia severity and naïve listeners’ subjective ratings. Although both linguistically based and proposition-based measures significantly predicted aphasia severity, a subset of linguistic measures focusing on the quantity and efficiency of production were particularly useful for clinical estimation of the fluency status of aphasia. Conclusions: The linguistically based measures appeared to be the most clinically effective and powerful in reflecting PWA’s performance of spoken discourse.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofAmerican Journal of Speech-Language Pathology-
dc.titleAn integrative analysis of spontaneous storytelling discourse in aphasia: Relationship with listeners’ rating and prediction of severity and fluency status of aphasia-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1044/2018_AJSLP-18-0015-
dc.identifier.pmid30458505-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC6436460-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85057174889-
dc.identifier.volume27-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage1491-
dc.identifier.epage1505-
dc.identifier.eissn1558-9110-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000451206200014-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats