• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

走向高效、生态的互动评估:协同构建沟通的范围综述。

Towards efficient, ecological assessment of interaction: A scoping review of co-constructed communication.

机构信息

Centre for Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 May-Jun;59(3):831-875. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12957. Epub 2023 Oct 21.

DOI:10.1111/1460-6984.12957
PMID:37864388
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The complexity of communication presents challenges for clinical assessment, outcome measurement and intervention for people with acquired brain injury. For the purposes of assessment or treatment, this complexity is usually managed by isolating specific linguistic functions or speech acts from the interactional context. Separating linguistic functions from their interactional context can lead to discourse being viewed as a static entity comprised of discrete features, rather than as a dynamic process of co-constructing meaning. The ecological validity of discourse assessments which rely on the deconstruction of linguistic functions is unclear. Previous studies have reported assessment tasks that preserve some of the dialogic features of communication, but as yet, these tasks have not been identified as a distinct genre of assessment. We suggest the term 'co-constructed communication' to describe tasks which are specifically designed to capture the dynamic, jointly produced nature of communication within a replicable assessment task.

AIMS

To identify and summarize how co-constructed communication has been assessed with individuals with non-progressive acquired communication disability regarding task design, measures and psychometric robustness.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was used to identity relevant studies. Systematic database searches were conducted on studies published before July 2021. Studies in the yield were assessed against eligibility criteria, with 37 studies identified as eligible for inclusion.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

This is the first time that co-constructed communication has been defined as a genre of discourse assessment for stroke and traumatic brain injury populations. Co-constructed communication has been assessed for 144 individuals with aphasia and 111 with cognitive-communication disability. Five categories of co-constructed communication tasks were identified, ranging in complexity. Variability exists in how these assessment tasks are labelled and measured. Assessment measures require further psychometric profiling, specifically regarding test-retest reliability and validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-constructed communication is a discourse genre which offers researchers and clinicians a replicable method to assess language and communication in an experimentally rigorous way, within an ecologically valid context, bridging the gap between experimental and ecological assessment approaches.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject Standardized assessments of language skills and monologue offer reliable, replicable ways to measure language. However, isolating language from an interactional context fundamentally changes the behaviour under study. This raises questions about the ecological validity of the measures we routinely use to determine diagnoses, guide treatment planning and measure the success of treatment. What this study adds to the existing knowledge This review highlights studies that conceptualize, and often quantify, interaction by combining experimental rigour and aspects of everyday dialogue. This is the first time this genre of discourse assessment has been identified. We propose the term 'co-constructed communication' to describe this genre and provide an operational definition for the term. What are the practical and clinical implications of this study? Co-constructed communication assessment tasks require refinement, particularly regarding aspects of psychometric robustness. In the future, these tasks offer pragmatic, meaningful ways to capture the effect and impact of aphasia and cognitive-communication disability within interaction.

摘要

背景

沟通的复杂性给后天脑损伤患者的临床评估、结果测量和干预带来了挑战。为了评估或治疗的目的,这种复杂性通常通过从互动语境中分离出特定的语言功能或言语行为来处理。将语言功能与其互动语境分离可能会导致话语被视为由离散特征组成的静态实体,而不是作为共同构建意义的动态过程。依赖于语言功能解构的话语评估的生态有效性尚不清楚。以前的研究报告了一些保留了沟通对话特征的评估任务,但迄今为止,这些任务尚未被确定为一种独特的评估类型。我们建议使用“共同构建的沟通”一词来描述专门设计用于捕捉沟通的动态、共同产生性质的任务,这些任务在可复制的评估任务中是可以实现的。

目的

确定并总结在针对非进行性后天性交流障碍的个体时,如何根据任务设计、测量和心理测量学稳健性来评估共同构建的沟通。

方法

使用范围综述方法来确定相关研究。对 2021 年 7 月之前发表的研究进行了系统的数据库搜索。对产生的研究进行了符合入选标准的评估,有 37 项研究被确定为符合入选标准。

主要贡献

这是首次将共同构建的沟通定义为一种用于中风和创伤性脑损伤人群的话语评估类型。已经对 144 名失语症患者和 111 名认知沟通障碍患者进行了共同构建的沟通评估。确定了五类共同构建的沟通任务,其复杂程度各不相同。这些评估任务的标签和测量方式存在差异。评估措施需要进一步进行心理测量学分析,特别是在测试-重测信度和有效性方面。

结论

共同构建的沟通是一种话语类型,为研究人员和临床医生提供了一种可复制的方法,可在生态上有效的背景下以实验严谨的方式评估语言和沟通,在实验评估方法和生态评估方法之间架起了桥梁。

本文的新增内容

关于这个主题已经知道的内容

语言技能和独白的标准化评估提供了可靠、可重复的方法来衡量语言。然而,将语言从互动语境中分离出来,从根本上改变了研究中的行为。这就引发了关于我们常规用于确定诊断、指导治疗计划和衡量治疗效果的测量方法的生态有效性的问题。

本研究在现有知识基础上的新增内容

本综述强调了那些通过结合实验严谨性和日常对话的各个方面来概念化和量化互动的研究。这是首次确定这种话语评估类型。我们建议使用“共同构建的沟通”一词来描述这种类型,并为该术语提供一个操作定义。

这项研究的实际和临床意义是什么?共同构建的沟通评估任务需要进一步完善,特别是在心理测量学稳健性方面。未来,这些任务将提供实用且有意义的方法来捕捉失语症和认知沟通障碍在互动中的影响和作用。

相似文献

1
Towards efficient, ecological assessment of interaction: A scoping review of co-constructed communication.走向高效、生态的互动评估:协同构建沟通的范围综述。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 May-Jun;59(3):831-875. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12957. Epub 2023 Oct 21.
2
Co-constructed communication therapy for individuals with acquired brain injury: A systematic review.协同构建的沟通疗法治疗后天性脑损伤:系统综述。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 Mar-Apr;59(2):496-518. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12841. Epub 2023 Jan 14.
3
Positive effects of speech and language therapy group interventions in primary progressive aphasia: A systematic review.言语语言治疗小组干预对原发性进行性失语症的积极影响:系统评价。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 Sep-Oct;59(5):1832-1849. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.13031. Epub 2024 Apr 11.
4
Methodologies for assessing morphosyntactic ability in people with Alzheimer's disease.评估阿尔茨海默病患者形态句法能力的方法。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 Jan-Feb;59(1):38-57. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12862. Epub 2023 Feb 25.
5
Using longitudinal qualitative research to explore the experience of receiving and using augmentative and alternative communication.运用纵向定性研究来探索接受和使用辅助性和替代性沟通的体验。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 May-Jun;59(3):1043-1065. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12981. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
6
A systematic review of speech, language and communication interventions for children with Down syndrome from 0 to 6 years.对0至6岁唐氏综合征儿童言语、语言和沟通干预措施的系统评价。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2022 Mar;57(2):441-463. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12699. Epub 2022 Feb 22.
7
A Scoping Review of the Observed and Perceived Functional Impacts Associated With Language and Learning Disorders in School-Aged Children.一项关于学龄儿童语言和学习障碍相关的观察到的和感知到的功能影响的范围综述。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2025 Jul-Aug;60(4):e70086. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.70086.
8
A qualitative systematic review of the role of families in supporting communication in people with dementia.一项关于家庭在支持痴呆症患者沟通方面作用的定性系统评价。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2022 Sep;57(5):1130-1153. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12738. Epub 2022 Jun 17.
9
The Lived Experience of Autistic Adults in Employment: A Systematic Search and Synthesis.成年自闭症患者的就业生活经历:系统检索与综述
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Dec 2;6(4):495-509. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0114. eCollection 2024 Dec.
10
Short-Term Memory Impairment短期记忆障碍

引用本文的文献

1
Multiparty Communication: A New Direction in Characterizing the Impact of Traumatic Brain Injury on Social Communication.多方沟通:表征创伤性脑损伤对社交沟通影响的新方向。
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2025 Jun 26;34(3S):1896-1909. doi: 10.1044/2025_AJSLP-24-00151. Epub 2025 Jun 16.
2
Reliability of the Brief Assessment of Transactional Success in Communication in Aphasia.失语症交流中交易成功简短评估的信度
Aphasiology. 2025;39(3):363-384. doi: 10.1080/02687038.2024.2351029. Epub 2024 May 16.