Francescaroberta Panuccio, Giulia Rossi, Anita Di Nuzzo, Ilaria Ruotolo, Giada Cianfriglia, Rachele Simeon, Giovanni Sellitto, Anna Berardi, Giovanni Galeoto
{"title":"Quality of Assessment Tools for Aphasia: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Francescaroberta Panuccio, Giulia Rossi, Anita Di Nuzzo, Ilaria Ruotolo, Giada Cianfriglia, Rachele Simeon, Giovanni Sellitto, Anna Berardi, Giovanni Galeoto","doi":"10.3390/brainsci15030271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: Aphasia is a neurological condition affecting the ability to understand and/or express language fluently and accurately, and can occur following stroke, traumatic injuries, or other brain pathologies. The aim of the following study was to provide clinicians and researchers information regarding the existing assessment tools to assess aphasia. <b>Methods</b>: For this Systematic Review, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for articles published up to August 2024. Authors independently identified eligible studies based on predefined inclusion criteria and extracted data. The study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. <b>Results:</b> Of the 1278 publications identified and screened, 238 studies fell within the inclusion criteria and were critically reviewed, and 164 assessment tools were found and divided into 8 main domains; the most used tools were the Language Screening Test (LAST), the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 (SAQOL-39), the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS), and the Token test. <b>Conclusions</b>: This review has emphasized the need for agreement among researchers as to which tool must be studied or adapted to other national contexts to develop universal norms and standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":9095,"journal":{"name":"Brain Sciences","volume":"15 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11940547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15030271","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Aphasia is a neurological condition affecting the ability to understand and/or express language fluently and accurately, and can occur following stroke, traumatic injuries, or other brain pathologies. The aim of the following study was to provide clinicians and researchers information regarding the existing assessment tools to assess aphasia. Methods: For this Systematic Review, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for articles published up to August 2024. Authors independently identified eligible studies based on predefined inclusion criteria and extracted data. The study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Results: Of the 1278 publications identified and screened, 238 studies fell within the inclusion criteria and were critically reviewed, and 164 assessment tools were found and divided into 8 main domains; the most used tools were the Language Screening Test (LAST), the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 (SAQOL-39), the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS), and the Token test. Conclusions: This review has emphasized the need for agreement among researchers as to which tool must be studied or adapted to other national contexts to develop universal norms and standards.
期刊介绍:
Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes and short communications in the areas of cognitive neuroscience, developmental neuroscience, molecular and cellular neuroscience, neural engineering, neuroimaging, neurolinguistics, neuropathy, systems neuroscience, and theoretical and computational neuroscience. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.