Telepractice Assessments for Individuals with Aphasia: A Systematic Review.

Telemed J E Health

Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

Published: January 2025

Current literature broadly demonstrates the effectiveness and feasibility of telepractice services for people with aphasia. However, the examination of telepractice assessments for people with aphasia is limited. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the current use of telepractice assessment protocols for people with aphasia. Specifically, the review sought to: (a) identify the assessments utilized in the aphasia telepractice literature; (b) appraise critically the quality of such investigations; and (c) evaluate critically the psychometric properties of the standardized tests used. A review of the literature published in English since 2000 was conducted in January 2023 by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. A total of 2,429 articles were screened. Two reviewers assessed records independently finding 11 articles eligible for inclusion. Data extraction was conducted once and validated by a second reviewer. Quality appraisal was carried out for the included studies as well as for the standardized testing measures used in these studies. There was a lack of variation among the telepractice assessment protocols and aphasia tests used across all the included studies. That is, there was limited investigation of screening tests, discourse analysis, extralinguistic cognitive measures, and the use of patient-reported measures. Study characteristics lacked high-quality and free-of-bias examinations. Most standardized tests that were utilized exhibited poor validity and reliability properties. Overall, the current systematic review pointed to the need to investigate a wider range of aphasia assessment protocols that can be offered via telepractice. Moreover, more robust research designs are necessary to examine the variety of assessment tests and/or procedures that are available for in-person aphasia assessment services. Finally, given that many tests used in the included studies had psychometric property issues, the current review raised concerns regarding the use of these tests in research and clinical practices.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2024.0268DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

systematic review
12
people aphasia
12
assessment protocols
12
included studies
12
telepractice assessments
8
aphasia
8
telepractice assessment
8
standardized tests
8
tests included
8
aphasia assessment
8

Similar Publications

Background: Tissue-based genomic classifiers (GCs) have been developed to improve prostate cancer (PCa) risk assessment and treatment recommendations.

Purpose: To summarize the impact of the Decipher, Oncotype DX Genomic Prostate Score (GPS), and Prolaris GCs on risk stratification and patient-clinician decisions on treatment choice among patients with localized PCa considering first-line treatment.

Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science published from January 2010 to August 2024.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is a primary contributor to death after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), with significant incidence. Therefore, early determination of the risk of DCI is an urgent need. Machine learning (ML) has received much attention in clinical practice.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Telehealth interventions can effectively support caregivers of people with dementia by providing care and improving their health outcomes. However, to successfully translate research into clinical practice, the content and details of the interventions must be sufficiently reported in published papers.

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the completeness of a telehealth intervention reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted for caregivers of people with dementia.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) to monitor and improve the health of people with psychosis or bipolar disorder show promise; however, user engagement is variable, and integrated clinical use is low.

Objective: This prospectively registered systematic review examined barriers and facilitators of clinician and patient engagement with DMHIs, to inform implementation within real-world settings.

Methods: A systematic search of 7 databases identified empirical studies reporting qualitative or quantitative data about factors affecting staff or patient engagement with DMHIs aiming to monitor or improve the mental or physical health of people with psychosis or bipolar disorder.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!