Assessment practices of speech-language pathologists for cognitive communication disorders following traumatic brain injury in adults: An international survey

References

• Morgan AT, Skeat J. Evaluating service delivery for speech and swallowing problems following paediatric brain injury: An International survey. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2011;17:275–281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steel J, Ferguson A, Spencer E, Togher L. Speech pathologists' current practice with cognitive-communication assessment during post-traumatic amnesia: A survey. Brain Injury 2013;27:819–830
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkstra KM. Evidence-based practice for cognitive-communication disorders after traumatic brain injury. Seminars in Speech & Language 2005;26:213–214
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ylvisaker M, Coelho C, Kennedy M, Sohlberg MM, Turkstra L, Avery J, Yorkston K. Reflections on evidence-based practice and rational clinical decision making. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 2002;10:xxv–xxxiii
   Google Scholar
• Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists. RCSLT Clinical Guidelines. Oxon, UK: Speechmark Publishing Ltd; 2005
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language Hearing Association. Evaluating and treating communication and cognitive disorders: Approaches to referral and collaboration for speech language pathology and clinical neuropsychology [Technical Reprt]. Rockville, MD, 2003. Available from www.asha.org/policy, accessed 30/3/2013
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Roles of speech language pathologists in the identification, diagnosis, and treatment of individuals with cognitive-communication disorders: Position statement [Position Statement]. Rockville, MD. 2005. Available online at: www.asha.org/policy2005, Accessed 24/8/2012
   Google Scholar
• College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario. Preferred practice guidelines for cognitive-communication disorders. Ontario, Canada, 2002. Available online at: www.caslpo.com/Portals/0/ppg/ppg_ccd, accessed 1/4/2013
   Google Scholar
• Turkstra L, Ylvisaker M, Coelho C, Kennedy M, Sohlberg MM, Avery J, Yorkston K. Practice guidelines for standardized assessment for persons with traumatic brain injury. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 2005;13:ix--xxxviii
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho C, Ylvisaker M, Turkstra LS. Nonstandardized assessment approaches for individuals with traumatic brain injuries. Seminars in Speech & Language 2005;26:223–241
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation. Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo; 1996
   Google Scholar
• Frattali C, Thompson C, Holland A, Wohl C, Ferketic M. American Speech Language Hearing Association Functional Assessment of Communication Skills for Adults (ASHA FACS). Rockville, MD: American Speech Language Hearing Association; 1995
   Google Scholar
• Holland A, Frattali C, Fromm D. Communication Activities of Daily Living. 2nd ed. Austin, TX: PRO-ED; 1999
   Google Scholar
• Randolph C. Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status. 1st ed. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 2001
   Google Scholar
• Kertesz A. Western Aphasia Battery- Revised. Harcourt Assessment, San Antonio, TX: Inc; 2006
   Google Scholar
• Frank EM, Williams AR, Butler JG. Current socio-cognitive communication assessment protocols for children with traumatic brain injury. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 1997;5:97–111
   Google Scholar
• McGrane S, Cascella P. TBI knowledge and pragmatic assessment among Connecticut school speech language pathologists. Brain Injury 2000;14:975–986
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkstra L, Coelho C, Ylvisaker M. The use of standardized tests for individuals with cognitive-communication disorders. Seminars in Speech and Language 2005;26:215–222
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Frank EM, Barrineau S. Current speech-language assessment protocols for adults with traumatic brain injury. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 1996;4:81–101
   Google Scholar
• Verna A, Davidson B, Rose T. Speech-language pathology services for people with aphasia: A survey of current practice in Australia. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 2009;11:191–205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie N, Threats TT, Kagan A. Outcome assessment in aphasia: A survey. Journal of Communication Disorders 2005;38:1–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson FC, Harpur J, McConnell N. Vegetative and minimally conscious state(s) survey: Attitudes of clinical neuropsychologists and speech and language therapists. Disability and Rehabilitation 2007;29:1751–1756
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiel A, Wilson B, McLellan L. The Wessex Headn Injury Matrix (WHIM). Bury St Edmunds, UK: Thames Valley Test Company; 2000
   Google Scholar
• Steel J, Ferguson A, Spencer E, Togher LSpeech pathologists' current practice with cognitive communication assessment during post-traumatic amnesia: A survey. Brain Injury 2013;27:819--830
   Google Scholar
• Duff MC, Proctor A, Haley K. Mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI): Assessment and treatment procedures used by speech-language pathologists (SLPs). Brain Injury 2002;16:773–787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross-Swain D. Ross Information Processing Assessment. 2nd ed. (RIPA-2). Austin, TX: PRO-ED; 1996
   Google Scholar
• Goodglass H, Kaplan E. Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination. 3rd ed. (BDAE). Austin, TX: PRO-ED; 2000
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan E, Goodglass H, Weintraub S. The Boston Naming Test. 2nd ed. (BNT-2). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed; 2001
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald S. Functional Assessment of Verbal Reasoning and Executive Strategies. Ontario, Canada: CCD Publishing; 2003
   Google Scholar
• Wiig EH, Secord W. Test of Language Competence – Expanded Edition (TLC -Expanded). San Antonio, TX: Pearson; 1989
   Google Scholar
• Bowers L, Huisingh R, LoGiudice C, Orman J. The Word Test 2. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed; 2005
   Google Scholar
• Wong MN, Murdoch B, Whelan B-M. Language disorders subsequent to mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI): Evidence from four cases. Aphasiology 2010;24:1155–1169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helm-Estabrooks N. Cognitive Linguistic Quick Test (CLQT). San Antonio, TX: Pearson; 2001
   Google Scholar
• Blyth T, Scott A, Bond A, Paul E. A comparison of two assessments of high level cognitive communication disorders in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2012;26:234–240
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz RC, Hallowell B, Code C, Armstrong E, Roberts P, Pound C, Katz L. A multinational comparison of aphasia management practices. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 2000;35:303–314
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay J, Coltheart M, Lesser R. Pscholinguistic Assessments of Language Processing in Aphasia (PALPA). Oxford, UK: Psychology Press; 1992
   Google Scholar
• Christie J, Clark C, Mortensen L. Mount Wilga High Level Language Test. Unpublished Test: Speech Pathology Department Mount Wilga Rehabilitation Centre; 1986
   Google Scholar
• Vogel AP, Maruff P, Morgan AT. Evaluation of communication assessment practices during the acute stages post stroke. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2010;16:1183–1188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larkins B. The Application of the ICF in Cognitive-Communication Disorders following Traumatic Brain Injury. Seminars in Speech & Language 2007;28:334–342
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hughes J, Orange JB. Mapping functional communication measurements for traumatic brain injury to the WHO-ICF. Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology 2007;31:134–143
   Google Scholar
• Togher L. Discourse sampling in the 21st century. Journal of Communication Disorders 2001;34:131–150
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho CA. Management of discourse deficits following traumatic brain injury: Progress, caveats, and needs. Seminars in Speech & Language 2007;28:122--135
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ellmo W, Graser J, Calabrese D. Methods of assessment utilized by speech-language pathologists with traumatically brain injured adults. A national survey. Journal of New Jersey Speech and Hearing Association 1997;6:17–23
   Google Scholar
• Hofmans J, Theuns P, van Acker F. Combining quality and quantity. A psychometric evaluation of the self-anchoring scale. Quality and Quantity 2009;43:703–716
   Google Scholar
• Blais JG, Grondin J. The influence of labels associated with anchor points of likert-type response scales in survey questionnaires. Journal of Applied Measurement 2011;12:370–386
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Howell D. Fundamental Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press; 1995
   Google Scholar
• Ellmo W, Graser J, Krchnavek B, Hauk K, Calabrese D. Measure of Cognitive Linguistic Abilities (MCLA). Norcross, GA: The Speech Bin; 1995
   Google Scholar
• Douglas J, Bracy C, Snow P. La Trobe Communication Questionnaire. Bundoora, Victoria: Victoria School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University; 2000
   Google Scholar
• McDonald S, Flanagan S, Rollins J. Awareness of Social Inference Test, (TASIT). Sydney, Australia: Pearson; 2002
   Google Scholar
• Howard D, Swinburn K, Porter G. Comprehensive Aphasia Test. Routledge: Psychology Press; 2004
   Google Scholar
• Adamovich B, Henderson J. Scales of Cognitive Ability for Traumatic Brain Injury (SCATBI). Austin, TX: PRO-ED; 1992
   Google Scholar
• McDonald S, Flanagan S, Rollins J, Kinch J. TASIT: A new clinical tool for assessing social perception after traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2003;3:219–238
   Google Scholar
• King KA, Hough MS, Walker MM, Rastatter M, Holbert D. Mild traumatic brain injury: Effects on naming in word retrieval and discourse. Brain Injury 2006;20:725–732
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas JM, Bracy CA, Snow PC. Measuring perceived communicative ability after traumatic brain injury: Reliability and validity of the La Trobe Communication Questionnaire. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2007;22:31–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parrish C, Roth C, Roberts B, Davie G. Assessment of cognitive-communicative disorders of mild traumatic brain injury sustained in combat. Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language Disorders 2009;19:47–57
   Google Scholar
• Wertheimer JC, Roebuck-Spencer TM, Constantinidou F, Turkstra L, Pavol M, Paul D. Collaboration between neuropsychologists and speech-language pathologists in rehabilitation settings. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2008;23:273–285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabin LA, Barr WB, Burton LA. Assessment practices of clinical neuropsychologists in the United States and Canada: A survey of INS, NAN, and APA Division 40 members. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 2005;20:33–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaki E, Turkstra L. Communication abilities and work re-entry following traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2000;14:441–453
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernicot J, Dardier V. Communication deficits: Assessment of subjects with frontal lobe damage in an interview setting. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 2001;36:245–263
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parkin AE, McMahon S, Upfield N, Copley J, Hollands K. Work experience program at a metropolitan paediatric hospital: Assisting rurual and metropolitan allied health professionals exchange clinical skills. Australian Journal of Rural Health 2001;9:297–303
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee JW, Jones PS, Mineyama Y, Zhang XE. Cultural differences in responses to a Likert scale. Research in Nursing and Health 2002;25:295–306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar