Exploring the Complexity of Aphasia With Network Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Sameer Ashaie ◽  
Nichol Castro
Keyword(s):  
Network Analysis ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Clinical Intervention ◽  
Standardized Assessments ◽  
Auditory Comprehension ◽  
Cognitive Assessments ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
Complex Relationships ◽  
Naming Test

Purpose Aphasia is a complex, neurogenic language disorder, with different aphasia syndromes hallmarked by impairment in fluency, auditory comprehension, naming, and/or repetition. Broad, standardized assessments of language domains and specific language and cognitive assessments provide a holistic impairment profile of a person with aphasia. While many recognize the correlations between assessments, there remains a need to continue understanding the complexity of relationships between assessments for the purpose of better characterization of language impairment profiles of persons with aphasia. We explored the use of network analysis to identify the complex relationships between a variety of language assessments. Method We computed a regularized partial correlation network and a directed acyclic graph network to estimate the relations between different aphasia assessments in 128 persons with aphasia. Results Western Aphasia Battery–Revised Comprehension subtest was the most central assessment in the aphasia symptom network, whereas the Philadelphia Naming Test had the most putative causal influence on other assessments. Additionally, the language assessments segregated into three empirically derived communities denoting phonology, semantics, and syntax. Furthermore, several assessments, including the Philadelphia Naming Test, belonged to multiple communities, suggesting that certain assessments may capture multiple language impairments. Conclusion We discuss the implications of using a network analysis approach for clinical intervention and driving forward novel questions in the field of clinical aphasiology. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16620229

Qualitative Examination of Children's Naming Skills through Test Adaptations

1987 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Fried-Oken
Keyword(s):  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Treatment Goals ◽  
Expressive Vocabulary ◽  
Qualitative Information ◽  
Word Finding ◽  
Confrontation Naming ◽  
Naming Test

A new procedure entitled the Double Administration Naming Technique is proposed to assist the clinician in obtaining qualitative information about a client's visual confrontation naming skills. It involves the administration of the standard naming test followed by a readministration of the instrument. A series of naming cues then are presented. By examining the number and types of naming errors produced during the two test presentations, the clinician distinguishes word-finding problems from expressive vocabulary limitations and qualitatively describes the language disorder. The cues that facilitate correct naming are used to plan effective treatment goals.

Considering the Language Disorder Label Debate From a School Speech-Language Pathology Lens

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-54
Author(s):  
Kimberly A. Murza ◽  
Barbara J. Ehren
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Speech Language Pathologist ◽  
School Based ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Education Act

Purpose The purpose of this article is to situate the recent language disorder label debate within a school's perspective. As described in two recent The ASHA Leader articles, there is international momentum to change specific language impairment to developmental language disorder . Proponents of this change cite increased public awareness and research funding as part of the rationale. However, it is unclear whether this label debate is worthwhile or even practical for the school-based speech-language pathologist (SLP). A discussion of the benefits and challenges to a shift in language disorder labels is provided. Conclusions Although there are important arguments for consistency in labeling childhood language disorder, the reality of a label change in U.S. schools is hard to imagine. School-based services are driven by eligibility through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which has its own set of labels. There are myriad reasons why advocating for the developmental language disorder label may not be the best use of SLPs' time, perhaps the most important of which is that school SLPs have other urgent priorities.

A 200-Year History of the Study of Childhood Language Disorders of Unknown Origin: Changes in Terminology

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence B. Leonard
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Language Disorders ◽  
Unknown Origin ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
The Past ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Many

Purpose The current “specific language impairment” and “developmental language disorder” discussion might lead to important changes in how we refer to children with language disorders of unknown origin. The field has seen other changes in terminology. This article reviews many of these changes. Method A literature review of previous clinical labels was conducted, and possible reasons for the changes in labels were identified. Results References to children with significant yet unexplained deficits in language ability have been part of the scientific literature since, at least, the early 1800s. Terms have changed from those with a neurological emphasis to those that do not imply a cause for the language disorder. Diagnostic criteria have become more explicit but have become, at certain points, too narrow to represent the wider range of children with language disorders of unknown origin. Conclusions The field was not well served by the many changes in terminology that have transpired in the past. A new label at this point must be accompanied by strong efforts to recruit its adoption by clinical speech-language pathologists and the general public.

Language and Behavior Disorders in School-Age Children: Comorbidity and Communication in the Classroom

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 111-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Hollo
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
School Age ◽  
Social Emotional ◽  
Behavioral Support ◽  
School Professionals ◽  
Development Characteristic ◽  
And Behavior

Language development is the foundation for competence in social, emotional, behavioral, and academic performance. Although language impairment (LI) is known to co-occur with behavioral and mental health problems, LI is likely to be overlooked in school-age children with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD; Hollo, Wehby, & Oliver, in press). Because language deficits may contribute to the problem behavior and poor social development characteristic of children with EBD, the consequences of an undiagnosed language disorder can be devastating. Implications include the need to train school professionals to recognize communication deficits. Further, it is critically important that specialists collaborate to provide linguistic and behavioral support for students with EBD and LI.

scholarly journals Developmental Language Disorder and Autism: Commonalities and Differences on Language

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 589
Author(s):  
Natasa Georgiou ◽  
George Spanoudis
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Autism Group ◽  
Developmental Conditions

Language and communication deficits characterize both autism spectrum disorder and developmental language disorder, and the possibility of there being a common profile of these is a matter of tireless debate in the research community. This experimental study addresses the relation of these two developmental conditions in the critical topic of language. Α total of 103 children (79 males, 24 females) participated in the present study. Specifically, the study’s sample consisted of 40 children with autism, 28 children with developmental language disorder, and 35 typically developing children between 6 and 12 years old. All children completed language and cognitive measures. The results showed that there is a subgroup inside the autism group of children who demonstrate language difficulties similar to children with developmental language disorder. Specifically, two different subgroups were derived from the autism group; those with language impairment and those without. Both autism and language-impaired groups scored lower than typically developing children on all language measures indicating a common pathology in language ability. The results of this study shed light on the relation between the two disorders, supporting the assumption of a subgroup with language impairment inside the autism spectrum disorder population. The common picture presented by the two developmental conditions highlights the need for further research in the field.

Early Language Delay and Risk for Language Impairment

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica M. Ellis ◽  
Donna J. Thal
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Language Delay ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Early Language ◽  
Late Talkers ◽  
Late Talker ◽  
Early Language Delay ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Normal Variability

Abstract Clinicians are often faced with the difficult task of deciding whether a late talker shows normal variability or has a clinically significant language disorder. This article provides an overview of research investigating identification, characteristics, outcomes, and predictors of late talkers. Clinical implications for speech-language pathologists in the identification and treatment of children who are late talkers are discussed.

Nominal Number and Language Pathologies

2021 ◽  
pp. 290-304
Author(s):  
Britta Biedermann ◽  
Nora Fieder ◽  
Karen Smith-Lock
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Developmental Delays ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Number Processing ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Cognitive Neuropsychology ◽  
Underlying Mechanisms ◽  
Grammatical Number ◽  
Insight Into

This chapter provides an overview of the evidence on grammatical number processing taken from cognitive neuropsychology, including developmental delays and impairments of language (e.g. developmental language disorder, and Williams syndrome) and aphasia, an acquired language impairment after brain injury. These types of language impairment can give insight into the functional architecture of nominal number processing by looking at error patterns that arise in each of the aforementioned populations. By classifying observed responses in language production tasks into non-number and number errors, we are able to reveal underlying mechanisms of syntactic rules and their representations when they develop, but also learn about processes and representation of number when this information breaks down.

A preliminary version of a computerized naming test for preschool children with language impairment

2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 115-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Birgitta Sahlén, ◽  
Karl Radeborg ◽  
Christina Reuterskiöld Wagner ◽  
Carolin Friberg ◽  
Lina Rydahl
Keyword(s):  
Preschool Children ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Preliminary Version ◽  
Naming Test

TRANSCORTICAL SENSORY APHASIA AS A MANIFESTATION OF ISCHEMIC STROKE WITH INTRACARDIAC THROMBUS

2021 ◽  
pp. 86-86
Author(s):  
Aziz Ahizoune ◽  
Ahmed Bourazza
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Brain Mri ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Sudden Onset ◽  
Left Middle Cerebral Artery ◽  
Intracardiac Thrombus ◽  
Auditory Comprehension ◽  
Sensory Aphasia ◽  
History Of ◽  
Left Middle

Transcortical sensory aphasia is characterized by impaired auditory comprehension, with intact repetition and uent speech. A 44-year-old right-handed patient with a history of hypertension on amlodipine and ischemic heart disease on aspirin was admitted to the neurology department for sudden onset of language impairment that started 2 days ago. The patient had features of transcortical sensory aphasia. Brain MRI showed an infarct in the territory of the left middle cerebral artery involving the tempo-parietal region. An apical thrombus was observed in the left ventricle on transthoracic echocardiography. This language impairment is thought to be caused by a disconnection between sensory language processes and semantic knowledge of objects. The prognosis is generally guarded and depends on the etiology and severity of the presentation

Discussion of Issues Related to Score Use and Interpretation of First Spoken and Signed Language Assessments

2021 ◽  
pp. 75-84
Author(s):  
Patrick Boudreault ◽  
Bernard Camilleri ◽  
Charlotte Enns
Keyword(s):  
Normative Data ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Standardized Assessments ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Target Populations ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Heterogenous Group ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
The Difference

A standardized assessment of spoken languages will collect data from native, monolingual speakers, thus establishing the range of receptive and/or expressive abilities of children across different ages. Similarly, normative data for standardized assessments of signed language are established by collecting data from native signing deaf children. Where the difference arises is the way in which the normative data relate to the target populations and the individuals within those populations who are being assessed. While standardized assessments of spoken language are normed on and predominantly intended for use with native speakers of that language, standardized assessments of signed language are intrinsically designed for use with a heterogenous group of children, of whom only a minority have the opportunity of learning signed language as their native language. In this chapter, key items related to score use and interpretation in first language (L1) assessment that were presented in Chapters 2.1 and 2.2 will be jointly discussed by the authors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document