Inamoto Yoko, Mukaino Masahiko, Imaeda Sayuri, Sawada Manami, Satoji Kumi, Nagai Ayako, Hirano Satoshi, Okazaki Hideto, Saitoh Eiichi, Sonoda Shigeru, Otaka Yohei
Faculty of Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences, Fujita Health University, Toyoake, Japan.
Deparment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
JMIR Form Res. 2023 Feb 8;7:e42219. doi: 10.2196/42219.
BACKGROUND: There is an extensive library of language tests, each with excellent psychometric properties; however, many of the tests available take considerable administration time, possibly bearing psychological strain on patients. The Short and Tailored Evaluation of Language Ability (STELA) is a simplified, tablet-based language ability assessment system developed to address this issue, with a reduced number of items and automated testing process. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to assess the administration time, internal consistency, and validity of the STELA. METHODS: The STELA consists of a tablet app, a microphone, and an input keypad for clinician's use. The system is designed to assess language ability with 52 questions grouped into 2 comprehension modalities (auditory comprehension and reading comprehension) and 3 expression modalities (naming and sentence formation, repetition, and reading aloud). Performance in each modality was scored as the correct answer rate (0-100), and overall performance expressed as the sum of modality scores (out of 500 points). RESULTS: The time taken to complete the STELA was significantly less than the time for the WAB (mean 16.2, SD 9.4 vs mean 149.3, SD 64.1 minutes; P<.001). The STELA's total score was strongly correlated with the WAB Aphasia Quotient (r=0.93, P<.001), supporting the former's concurrent validity concerning the WAB, which is a gold-standard aphasia assessment. Strong correlations were also observed at the subscale level; STELA auditory comprehension versus WAB auditory comprehension (r=0.75, P<.001), STELA repetition versus WAB repetition (r=0.96, P<.001), STELA naming and sentence formation versus WAB naming and word finding (r=0.81, P<.001), and the sum of STELA reading comprehension or reading aloud versus WAB reading (r=0.82, P<.001). Cronbach α obtained for each modality was .862 for auditory comprehension, .872 for reading comprehension, .902 for naming and sentence formation, .787 for repetition, and .892 for reading aloud. Global Cronbach α was .961. The average of the values of item-total correlation to each subscale was 0.61 (SD 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed significant time reduction in the assessment of language ability and provided evidence for good internal consistency and validity of the STELA tablet-based aphasia assessment system.
背景:有大量的语言测试库,每个测试都具有出色的心理测量特性;然而,许多现有的测试需要相当长的施测时间,这可能会给患者带来心理压力。简短且量身定制的语言能力评估(STELA)是一种简化的、基于平板电脑的语言能力评估系统,旨在解决这一问题,它减少了项目数量并实现了测试过程的自动化。 目的:本文旨在评估STELA的施测时间、内部一致性和效度。 方法:STELA由一个平板电脑应用程序、一个麦克风和一个供临床医生使用的输入键盘组成。该系统旨在通过52个问题评估语言能力,这些问题分为2种理解方式(听觉理解和阅读理解)和3种表达方式(命名和句子构成、复述、朗读)。每种方式的表现以正确答案率(0 - 100)计分,整体表现以方式得分总和(满分500分)表示。 结果:完成STELA所需的时间显著少于西方失语成套测验(WAB)所需时间(平均16.2分钟,标准差9.4分钟,而WAB平均为149.3分钟,标准差64.1分钟;P <.001)。STELA的总分与WAB失语商数高度相关(r = 0.93,P <.001),支持了STELA与作为失语症评估金标准的WAB的同时效度。在分量表水平也观察到了强相关性;STELA听觉理解与WAB听觉理解(r = 0.75,P <.001),STELA复述与WAB复述(r = 0.96,P <.001),STELA命名和句子构成与WAB命名和找词(r = 0.81,P <.001),以及STELA阅读理解或朗读总和与WAB阅读(r = 0.82,P <.001)。每种方式的Cronbach α系数分别为:听觉理解0.862,阅读理解0.872,命名和句子构成0.902,复述0.787,朗读0.892。整体Cronbach α系数为0.961。每个分量表的项目 - 总分相关值的平均值为0.61(标准差0.17)。 结论:我们的研究证实了在语言能力评估中施测时间显著减少,并为基于平板电脑的STELA失语症评估系统良好的内部一致性和效度提供了证据。
JMIR Form Res. 2023-2-8
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017-4
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2022-3-10
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2018-11
Handb Clin Neurol. 2022
Semin Speech Lang. 2021-6
J Med Internet Res. 2020-1-17
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2015
Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2015-2
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2011-6-2