Literature DB >> 33540723

Creating a Theoretical Framework to Underpin Discourse Assessment and Intervention in Aphasia.

Lucy Dipper1, Jane Marshall1, Mary Boyle2, Deborah Hersh3, Nicola Botting1, Madeline Cruice1.   

Abstract

Discourse (a unit of language longer than a single sentence) is fundamental to everyday communication. People with aphasia (a language impairment occurring most frequently after stroke, or other brain damage) have communication difficulties which lead to less complete, less coherent, and less complex discourse. Although there are multiple reviews of discourse assessment and an emerging evidence base for discourse intervention, there is no unified theoretical framework to underpin this research. Instead, disparate theories are recruited to explain different aspects of discourse impairment, or symptoms are reported without a hypothesis about the cause. What is needed is a theoretical framework that would clarify the specific linguistic skills that create completeness, coherence, and complexity (i.e., richness) in discourse, and illuminate both the processes involved in discourse production and the reasons for breakdown. This paper reports a review and synthesis of the theoretical literature relevant to spoken discourse in aphasia discourse, and we propose a novel theoretical framework which unites these disparate sources. This framework is currently being tested as the foundation for Linguistic Underpinnings of Narrative in Aphasia (LUNA) treatment research. In this paper, we outline the novel framework and exemplify how it might be used to guide clinical practice and research. Future collaborative research is needed to develop this framework into a processing model for spoken discourse.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aphasia; connected speech; discourse; narrative; storytelling; theory

Year:  2021        PMID: 33540723      PMCID: PMC7913065          DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11020183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Sci        ISSN: 2076-3425


  17 in total

1.  Social validity of changes in informativeness and efficiency of aphasic discourse following linguistic specific treatment (LST).

Authors:  B J Jacobs
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.381

2.  Metasynthesis: the state of the art--so far.

Authors:  Deborah L Finfgeld
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2003-09

3.  Pragmatics in discourse performance: insights from aphasiology.

Authors:  Hanna K Ulatowska; Gloria Streit Olness
Journal:  Semin Speech Lang       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 1.761

4.  The qualitative content analysis process.

Authors:  Satu Elo; Helvi Kyngäs
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.187

5.  Framing ideas in aphasia: the need for thinking therapy.

Authors:  Jane Marshall
Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.020

Review 6.  Reviewing the quality of discourse information measures in aphasia.

Authors:  Madeleine Pritchard; Katerina Hilari; Naomi Cocks; Lucy Dipper
Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 3.020

7.  Impact of aphasia on communication in couples.

Authors:  Claire Croteau; Paméla McMahon-Morin; Guylaine Le Dorze; Geneviève Baril
Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 3.020

8.  A system for quantifying the informativeness and efficiency of the connected speech of adults with aphasia.

Authors:  L E Nicholas; R H Brookshire
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1993-04

9.  Narrative discourse in anomic aphasia.

Authors:  Sara Andreetta; Anna Cantagallo; Andrea Marini
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2012-05-05       Impact factor: 3.139

10.  Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance.

Authors:  Peter Craig; Paul Dieppe; Sally Macintyre; Susan Michie; Irwin Nazareth; Mark Petticrew
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-09-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.