School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Central Florida, Orlando.
Department of Special Education and Counselling, The Education University of Hong Kong.
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 Nov 21;27(4):1491-1505. doi: 10.1044/2018_AJSLP-18-0015.
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.
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.
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.
The linguistically based measures appeared to be the most clinically effective and powerful in reflecting PWA's performance of spoken discourse.
本研究旨在探讨口语分析的三种方法（基于语言学的测量方法、基于命题的测量方法和故事语法）中，哪一种与失语症严重程度以及非专业听众对失语症患者言语产出的评价相关性最好。研究还检验了这些分析方法对失语症患者严重程度和流畅性状态的预测能力。最后，确定了哪种方法最能区分流畅性和非流畅性的失语症患者。
从粤语失语症语料库中提取了 68 名失语症患者和 68 名对照组的讲故事任务“狼来了”的音频文件和正字法转录本。每个转录本都使用这 3 种系统进行分析。
话语分析的语言学方法与失语症严重程度和非专业听众的主观评价相关性最好。虽然基于语言学的和基于命题的测量方法都显著预测了失语症的严重程度，但一组侧重于生成的数量和效率的语言学测量方法对于临床评估失语症的流畅性状态特别有用。
基于语言学的测量方法似乎在反映失语症患者口语表达方面最具临床有效性和影响力。
