Sohlberg McKay Moore, MacDonald Sheila, Byom Lindsey, Iwashita Heidi, Lemoncello Rik, Meulenbroek Peter, Ness Bryan, O'Neil-Pirozzi Therese M
a Academy of Neurological Communication Disorders , Traumatic Brain Injury Writing Committee.
b Communication Disorders & Sciences , University of Oregon , Eugene , OR , USA.
Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019 Apr;21(2):115-127. doi: 10.1080/17549507.2019.1583280. Epub 2019 Apr 7.
The primary aim of this paper was to identify and describe current social communication assessment tools for adults with traumatic brain injury.
We conducted a state-of-the-art review to identify and categorise the range of social communication assessment tools found in the assessment and treatment literature that revealed 42 measures that were coded according to characteristics related to assessment types, psychometrics, and implementation.
Of the 42 assessments, 64% evaluated social cognition and the remaining 36% evaluated communication. Coding of implementation categories revealed that only 18/42 (43%) measures were ecologically grounded and 23/42 (55%) were available to clinicians by purchase or in the public domain. Only three measures incorporated questions or an assessment of the examinee's priorities or concerns.
A number of factors limit current social communication assessment. The lack of tools that objectively and reliably evaluate communication or social cognition in ecologically valid ways remains problematic. Of particular concern is the lack of prioritisation of the individual's communication values and needs. Recommendations include a call to focus research on the development of more contextual, standardised assessments, consider availability and feasibility when tools are being developed, and evaluate assessment processes as well as discrete tools.
本文的主要目的是识别并描述当前用于创伤性脑损伤成人的社交沟通评估工具。
我们进行了一项最新综述,以识别并分类评估与治疗文献中发现的社交沟通评估工具的范围,结果发现了42种根据与评估类型、心理测量学和实施相关的特征进行编码的测量方法。
在这42项评估中,64%评估社交认知,其余36%评估沟通。实施类别编码显示,只有18/42(43%)的测量方法基于生态学原理,23/42(55%)的测量方法可供临床医生购买或在公共领域获取。只有三项测量方法纳入了关于受试者优先事项或关注点的问题或评估。
许多因素限制了当前的社交沟通评估。缺乏以生态学上有效的方式客观、可靠地评估沟通或社交认知的工具仍然是个问题。特别令人担忧的是缺乏对个体沟通价值观和需求的优先级考量。建议包括呼吁将研究重点放在开发更具情境性、标准化的评估上,在开发工具时考虑可用性和可行性,并评估评估过程以及单个工具。