Cargando…

Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accurate aphasia diagnosis is important in stroke care. A wide range of language tests are available and include informal assessments, tests developed by healthcare institutions and commercially published tests available for purchase in pre-packaged kits. The psychometrics of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rohde, Alexia, Worrall, Linda, Godecke, Erin, O’Halloran, Robyn, Farrell, Anna, Massey, Margaret
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5863973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29566043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194143
_version_ 1783308463963635712
author Rohde, Alexia
Worrall, Linda
Godecke, Erin
O’Halloran, Robyn
Farrell, Anna
Massey, Margaret
author_facet Rohde, Alexia
Worrall, Linda
Godecke, Erin
O’Halloran, Robyn
Farrell, Anna
Massey, Margaret
author_sort Rohde, Alexia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accurate aphasia diagnosis is important in stroke care. A wide range of language tests are available and include informal assessments, tests developed by healthcare institutions and commercially published tests available for purchase in pre-packaged kits. The psychometrics of these tests are often reported online or within the purchased test manuals, not the peer-reviewed literature, therefore the diagnostic capabilities of these measures have not been systematically evaluated. This review aimed to identify both commercial and non-commercial language tests and tests used in stroke care and to examine the diagnostic capabilities of all identified measures in diagnosing aphasia in stroke populations. METHODS: Language tests were identified through a systematic search of 161 publisher databases, professional and resource websites and language tests reported to be used in stroke care. Two independent reviewers evaluated test manuals or associated resources for cohort or cross-sectional studies reporting the tests’ diagnostic capabilities (sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios or diagnostic odds ratios) in differentiating aphasic and non-aphasic stroke populations. RESULTS: Fifty-six tests met the study eligibility criteria. Six “non-specialist” brief screening tests reported sensitivity and specificity information, however none of these measures reported to meet the specific diagnostic needs of speech pathologists. The 50 remaining measures either did not report validity data (n = 7); did not compare patient test performance with a comparison group (n = 17); included non-stroke participants within their samples (n = 23) or did not compare stroke patient performance against a language reference standard (n = 3). Diagnostic sensitivity analysis was completed for six speech pathology measures (WAB, PICA, CADL-2, ASHA-FACS, Adult FAVRES and EFA-4), however all studies compared aphasic performance with that of non-stroke healthy controls and were consequently excluded from the review. CONCLUSIONS: No speech pathology test was found which reported diagnostic data for identifying aphasia in stroke populations. A diagnostically validated post-stroke aphasia test is needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5863973
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58639732018-03-28 Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests Rohde, Alexia Worrall, Linda Godecke, Erin O’Halloran, Robyn Farrell, Anna Massey, Margaret PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accurate aphasia diagnosis is important in stroke care. A wide range of language tests are available and include informal assessments, tests developed by healthcare institutions and commercially published tests available for purchase in pre-packaged kits. The psychometrics of these tests are often reported online or within the purchased test manuals, not the peer-reviewed literature, therefore the diagnostic capabilities of these measures have not been systematically evaluated. This review aimed to identify both commercial and non-commercial language tests and tests used in stroke care and to examine the diagnostic capabilities of all identified measures in diagnosing aphasia in stroke populations. METHODS: Language tests were identified through a systematic search of 161 publisher databases, professional and resource websites and language tests reported to be used in stroke care. Two independent reviewers evaluated test manuals or associated resources for cohort or cross-sectional studies reporting the tests’ diagnostic capabilities (sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios or diagnostic odds ratios) in differentiating aphasic and non-aphasic stroke populations. RESULTS: Fifty-six tests met the study eligibility criteria. Six “non-specialist” brief screening tests reported sensitivity and specificity information, however none of these measures reported to meet the specific diagnostic needs of speech pathologists. The 50 remaining measures either did not report validity data (n = 7); did not compare patient test performance with a comparison group (n = 17); included non-stroke participants within their samples (n = 23) or did not compare stroke patient performance against a language reference standard (n = 3). Diagnostic sensitivity analysis was completed for six speech pathology measures (WAB, PICA, CADL-2, ASHA-FACS, Adult FAVRES and EFA-4), however all studies compared aphasic performance with that of non-stroke healthy controls and were consequently excluded from the review. CONCLUSIONS: No speech pathology test was found which reported diagnostic data for identifying aphasia in stroke populations. A diagnostically validated post-stroke aphasia test is needed. Public Library of Science 2018-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5863973/ /pubmed/29566043 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194143 Text en © 2018 Rohde et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rohde, Alexia
Worrall, Linda
Godecke, Erin
O’Halloran, Robyn
Farrell, Anna
Massey, Margaret
Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests
title Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests
title_full Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests
title_fullStr Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests
title_short Diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: A systematic review of language tests
title_sort diagnosis of aphasia in stroke populations: a systematic review of language tests
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5863973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29566043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194143
work_keys_str_mv AT rohdealexia diagnosisofaphasiainstrokepopulationsasystematicreviewoflanguagetests
AT worralllinda diagnosisofaphasiainstrokepopulationsasystematicreviewoflanguagetests
AT godeckeerin diagnosisofaphasiainstrokepopulationsasystematicreviewoflanguagetests
AT ohalloranrobyn diagnosisofaphasiainstrokepopulationsasystematicreviewoflanguagetests
AT farrellanna diagnosisofaphasiainstrokepopulationsasystematicreviewoflanguagetests
AT masseymargaret diagnosisofaphasiainstrokepopulationsasystematicreviewoflanguagetests