Kim JungWan, Shim Jihye, Yoon Ji Hye
Department of Speech and Language Pathology, College of Rehabilitation Sciences.
Rehabilitation & Science Graduate Program, Daegu University, Gyeongsan.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jan;98(2):e14041. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014041.
In clinical settings, the language ability of patients with neurologic communication disorders have been measured by quantitative parameters such as the total number of words in dialogue and picture description tasks. However, this quantitative analysis requires a long period of time in order to analyze the quantitative parameters, and results can differ according to discourse tasks. The purposes of this study are to explore whether SR-D may predict the quantitative measures of discourse tasks. Forty patients with amnestic MCI and 40 normal elderly participated in the study. We gathered responses to 10 items regarding SR-D and analyzed the quantitative measures of narrative discourse through 3 discourse tasks (i.e, picture description, dialogue, procedural discourse). We found significant differences in MLTW, CIU, and SR-D scores between the 2 groups. In particular, 4 items were significantly correlated with the performance of MLTW and CIU. Sensitivity and specificity of these 4 items were 100% and 75%, respectively. In terms of economic opportunity costs, objective measures cannot be evaluated to be practical, since it is used in research rather than clinical diagnosis in general. Therefore, evaluation of discourse using a few items proven in its sensitivity and specificity could allow a wide use of such measure in not only research but also in clinical diagnosis. These findings suggest that subjective measures of narrative discourse may be valid with objective language tests to predict individual discourse performance.
在临床环境中,患有神经交流障碍的患者的语言能力是通过定量参数来衡量的,比如对话和图片描述任务中的单词总数。然而,这种定量分析为了分析定量参数需要很长时间,并且结果可能因话语任务而有所不同。本研究的目的是探讨SR-D是否可以预测话语任务的定量指标。40名遗忘型轻度认知障碍患者和40名正常老年人参与了该研究。我们收集了关于SR-D的10个项目的回答,并通过3个话语任务(即图片描述、对话、程序性话语)分析了叙述性话语的定量指标。我们发现两组之间在平均语句长度(MLTW)、信息单位(CIU)和SR-D得分上存在显著差异。特别是,4个项目与MLTW和CIU的表现显著相关。这4个项目的敏感性和特异性分别为100%和75%。就经济机会成本而言,客观测量方法一般用于研究而非临床诊断,因此不能被评估为实用的方法。所以,使用少数几个经证明具有敏感性和特异性的项目来评估话语,不仅可以在研究中广泛使用这种测量方法,而且在临床诊断中也可以广泛使用。这些发现表明,叙述性话语的主观测量方法与客观语言测试相结合可能有效地预测个体的话语表现。