The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2021 Jul 14;30(4):1894-1908. doi: 10.1044/2021_AJSLP-20-00032. Epub 2021 Jun 1.
Purpose Limited evidence-based guidelines for test selection continue to result in inconsistency in test use and interpretation in speech-language pathology. A major barrier is the lack of explicit and consistent adoption of a validity framework by our field. In this viewpoint, we argue that adopting the conceptual validity framework in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association et al., 2014) would support both the development of more meaningful and feasible clinical tests and more appropriate use and interpretation of tests in speech-language pathology. Method We describe and evaluate the (American Educational Research Association et al., 2014) validity framework and consider its relevance to speech-language pathology. We describe how the validity framework could be integrated into clinical practice and include examples of how it could be applied to support common clinical decisions. We evaluate the costs and benefits of adopting this framework, from the perspectives of speech-language pathologists, clients, and test developers. Results The validity framework clarifies complex validity issues by shifting the focus of validity from tests to the decisions speech-language pathologists make based on test results. By focusing on decisions, the framework requires critical evaluation of test use, rather than evaluating tests against sets of criteria. Adopting this framework has the potential for appreciable improvement in the way tests are used and valued across our profession. Conclusions Speech-language pathologists, test developers, and clients will benefit from improved evidence-based assessment practices. It is recommended that regulators, test developers, professional associations, universities, and researchers adopt the framework and endorse it as best practice moving forward. This viewpoint proposes a series of first steps toward supporting uptake of the framework into research and practice.
循证指南在测试选择方面的证据有限，这导致言语病理学中测试的使用和解释仍然存在不一致性。一个主要障碍是我们领域缺乏明确和一致地采用有效性框架。在本观点中，我们认为采用《教育和心理测试标准》（美国教育研究协会等，2014 年）中的概念有效性框架将支持更有意义和可行的临床测试的发展，以及更适当的测试使用和解释。
我们描述和评估了《教育和心理测试标准》（美国教育研究协会等，2014 年）的有效性框架，并考虑了其与言语病理学的相关性。我们描述了如何将有效性框架整合到临床实践中，并包括了如何应用它来支持常见临床决策的示例。我们从言语病理学家、客户和测试开发者的角度评估了采用该框架的成本和收益。
有效性框架通过将重点从测试转移到言语病理学家基于测试结果做出的决策上来澄清复杂的有效性问题。通过关注决策，该框架要求对测试使用进行批判性评估，而不是根据一套标准评估测试。采用该框架有可能显著改善我们专业中测试的使用和重视方式。
言语病理学家、测试开发者和客户将从改进的基于证据的评估实践中受益。建议监管机构、测试开发者、专业协会、大学和研究人员采用该框架，并将其作为今后的最佳实践予以认可。本观点提出了一系列支持将该框架纳入研究和实践的第一步。
