Department of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.
Center for Education in Health Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2022 May 10;31(3):1424-1430. doi: 10.1044/2022_AJSLP-21-00269. Epub 2022 Mar 28.
The external validity of aphasia treatment research relies on diverse and representative participants. The purposes of this study were (a) to examine whether reporting of patient-reported age, sex, and race/ethnicity has improved since Ellis (2009) and (b) to evaluate whether these demographic variables were consistent with population-level estimates of stroke survivor demographics in the United States.
A scoping review examined U.S.-based aphasia treatment studies published between 2009 and 2019 and characterized the percentage of studies reporting age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Summary statistics for these variables were calculated and compared statistically with a population-based study of stroke survivors.
It was found out that 97.1% of studies reported age, 93.5% reported sex, and 28.1% reported race and/or ethnicity. Within reporting studies, participant mean age was 58.04 years, 61.6% of participants were men, and 38.4% were women; 86.5% of participants were White, 11.0% were Black, 2.0% were Hispanic/Latino, and 0.5% fell in other racial categories. All three variables were statistically different from the study of Kissela et al. (2012).
Despite being highlighted as an issue by Ellis (2009), less than 30% of recent aphasia treatment studies reported race or ethnicity, and participants do not appear to be demographically representative compared with estimates of stroke survivors living in the United States. These issues may negatively impact the ecological validity of aphasia treatment research. Aphasia researchers should more consistently report participant race and ethnicity and follow current guidelines for increasing the demographic representation of women and minorities.
失语症治疗研究的外部有效性依赖于多样化且具有代表性的参与者。本研究的目的是:(a) 检查自 Ellis(2009 年)以来,关于患者报告的年龄、性别和种族/民族的报告是否有所改善;(b) 评估这些人口统计学变量是否与美国脑卒中幸存者人口水平估计值一致。
采用范围综述方法,检查了 2009 年至 2019 年期间在美国发表的失语症治疗研究,并描述了报告年龄、性别和种族/民族的研究比例。对这些变量进行了汇总统计,并与一项基于美国脑卒中幸存者的人口研究进行了统计学比较。
结果显示,97.1%的研究报告了年龄,93.5%报告了性别,28.1%报告了种族和/或民族。在报告研究中,参与者的平均年龄为 58.04 岁,61.6%为男性,38.4%为女性;86.5%的参与者为白人,11.0%为黑人,2.0%为西班牙裔/拉丁裔,0.5%为其他种族。所有三个变量均与 Kissela 等人(2012 年)的研究存在统计学差异。
尽管 Ellis(2009 年)曾强调这是一个问题,但最近的失语症治疗研究中仍有不到 30%报告了种族或民族,与居住在美国的脑卒中幸存者的估计值相比,参与者的人口统计学特征似乎没有代表性。这些问题可能会对失语症治疗研究的生态有效性产生负面影响。失语症研究人员应更一致地报告参与者的种族和民族,并遵循当前关于增加女性和少数族裔代表性的指南。