1 |
Start with “Why,” but only if you have to: The strategic framing of novel ideas across different audiences
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
A Model of the Production Effect over the Short-Term: The Cost of Relative Distinctiveness
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
Two clinical markers for DLD in monolingual Italian speakers: what can they tell us about second language learners with DLD?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
An aphasia research agenda–a consensus statement from the collaboration of aphasia trialists
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
Decoding verbal working memory representations of Chinese characters from Broca's area
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Creating a novel approach to discourse treatment through coproduction with people with aphasia and speech and language therapists
|
|
Hersh, D.; Scarth, L.; Bannister, J.; Talbot, R.; Dhaliwal, V.; Grobler, S.; Morris, S.; Dipper, L.; Aujla, S.; Marshall, J.; Cruice, M.; Pritchard, M.; Charles, N.; Boyle, M.; Botting, N.. - : Informa UK Limited, 2021
|
|
Abstract:
Background Although spoken discourse is an outcome prioritised by all stakeholders in aphasia rehabilitation, assessment and treatment of discourse are not routine clinical practice. The small evidence base, varied clinical expertise, multiple barriers in the workplace, and challenges for clients in understanding their altered language abilities all contribute to this situation. These factors need serious consideration when developing a new treatment. Involving intended stakeholders as partners in the development process is recommended. This assists with future implementation by ensuring assessment and treatment are practical, feasible, and acceptable to those who will deliver and undertake it. Aims This paper reports on the coproduction phase of the Linguistic Underpinnings of Narrative in Aphasia (LUNA) research project and describes the levels of partners’ involvement, the outcomes and impact of coproduction, and the factors that influenced it. Methods and procedures Four partners with aphasia and four speech and language therapists (SLTs) worked with academic team members across a 6-month period to create the LUNA assessment and treatment. Separate sessions were held with partners with aphasia (monthly) and SLTs (fortnightly). Coproduction methods included open discussion, the Someone Who Isn’t Me (SWIM) technique (thinking from others’ perspectives), low and high fidelity prototypes, flexible brainstorming, card sort, and active experimentation with assessment and treatment tasks. Verbal and written information was presented, shared and documented during each session in supportive formats, and each session summarised as accessible minutes. Outcomes and Results Partners contributed at consultation, cooperation, and co-learning levels during the coproduction phase. Outcomes included joined-up thinking across assessment-goal setting-treatment-desired outcomes; agreed decisions and content for assessment protocol and treatment manual; clarity on personalised, meaningful, and relevant treatment; therapeutic alliance operationalised in treatment manual; and more. Impacts included increased confidence, self-knowledge, pride, validation, peer support, networking, and benefits to SLTs’ services. Coproduction was positively influenced by consistent session structure and conduct, group dynamics, accessible communication methods, active task experimentation, and SWIM technique. Although the process was time and labour intensive, all partners considered this worthwhile. Conclusions LUNA has exemplified how an inclusive coproduction process can work well despite the language challenges of aphasia. Authors also believe that coproduction with intended users has resulted in products (assessment protocol, treatment manual) that are more practical, feasible, and acceptable to clinicians and clients than if designed by academics alone. This latter claim now needs testing on a wide scale.
|
|
Keyword:
P Philology. Linguistics; RC0321 Neuroscience. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry
|
|
URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2021.1942775 https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/26395/4/02687038.2021.pdf https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/26395/
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
7 |
Lesion site and therapy time predict responses to a therapy for anomia after stroke: a prognostic model development study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
8 |
Utilising a systematic review-based approach to create a database of individual participant data for meta- and network meta-analyses: the RELEASE database of aphasia after stroke
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
Scoping opinion: Speech and language therapists' views on extending their role to the urgent ear, nose and throat pathway.
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
Dosage, Intensity, and Frequency of Language Therapy for Aphasia: A Systematic Review-Based, Individual Participant Data Network Meta-Analysis
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
13 |
‘Emotion is of the essence. … Number one priority’: A nested qualitative study exploring psychosocial adjustment to stroke and aphasia
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
14 |
"Loneliness can also kill:" a qualitative exploration of outcomes and experiences of the SUPERB peer-befriending scheme for people with aphasia and their significant others
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
15 |
A systematic review of language and communication intervention research delivered in groups to older adults living in care homes
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
16 |
Predictors of wellbeing in young adults with aphasia and young adults with developmental language disorder
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
The interplay between early social interaction, language and executive function development in deaf and hearing infants
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
18 |
A randomised controlled feasibility trial of music-assisted language telehealth intervention for minimally verbal autistic children-the MAP study protocol
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
20 |
UK Speech & Language Therapists working in school-aged children dysphagia practice. Impact of Covid19 on clinical practice: A survey
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|