Application of Main Concept Analysis and Story Narration Assessment in Aphasia Discourse Assessment
扫码查看
点击上方二维码区域，可以放大扫码查看
原文链接
维普
万方数据
目的 比较主概念分析和看图叙事评估在失语症语篇评估中的应用,探讨二者的临床适用性.方法 招募失语症患者8例和健康对照组22例,使用本土组图材料诱发语言样本,分别用主概念分析法和看图叙事法评估两组受试者的语言表现,比较组间差异,分析两种方法评估结果的一致性、评估者间信度和评估者内部信度.结果 主概念分析结果为失语症组准确且完整(accurate and complete,AC)主概念数(P＜0.01)、每分钟准确且完整(AC/min)主概念数(P＜0.05)和主概念分数(main concept,MC scores)(P＜0.05)均显著低于对照组,未提及(absent,AB)主概念数均显著高于对照组(P＜0.05);看图叙事评估结果为失语症组分图讲述内容评分(P＜0.05)、分图讲述总分(P＜0.05)和整体讲述总分(P＜0.05)均显著低于对照组.两种评估方法的标准分无显著差异,评估者间信度和评估者内部信度良好.结论 两种方法的临床适用性良好,评估结果一致.主概念分析在量化评估语篇信息的质与量方面有优势,看图叙事评估考查句法和语篇宏观结构,能反映整体语言表现.
Objective To compare the application of main concept analysis(MCA)and story narration as-sessment(SNA)in aphasia discourse assessment,and study their clinical applicability.Methods A total of 8 apha-sic and 22 healthy control subjects were recruited.Local sequential picture materials were used to elicit language samples.The differences between groups in the assessment results of the MCA and the SNA were compared,the consistency of the assessment results of the two methods were also analyzed.The inter-rater and the intra-rater reli-ability of the two methods was discussed.Results The results of the MCA showed that the number of accurate and complete(AC)main concepts(P＜0.01),the number of accurate and complete main concepts per minute(AC/min)(P＜0.05)and main concept scores(MC scores)(P＜0.05)of the aphasia group were significantly lower than those of the healthy group.The number of absent(AB)main concepts(P＜0.05)were significantly higher than those of the control group.As for the result of SNA,the score of the content of sub picture description(P＜0.05),the total score of sub picture description(P＜0.05)and the total score of overall description(P＜0.05)in the aphasia group were significantly less than those in the control group(P＜0.05).No significant difference be-tween the standardized scores of the two methods were observed,and inter-rater and the intra-rater reliability were both in a good range.Conclusion The clinical applicability of the two methods is excellent and the evaluation results are conststent.The MCA has outstanding advantages in evaluating the quality and quantity of information,while SNA examines the syntax and content organization,which can reflect the overall discourse performance.
Main concept analysisStory narration assessmentDiscourse assessentAphasia
维普
万方数据
