A core outcome set for aphasia treatment research: Obstacles, risks, and benefits

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

View addendum:

A good outcome for aphasia

This article refers to:

Challenges facing COS development for aphasia

This article is referred to by:

Time for a step change? Improving the efficiency, relevance, reliability, validity and transparency of aphasia rehabilitation research through core outcome measures, a common data set and improved reporting criteria

Measuring outcomes in aphasia research: A review of current practice and an agenda for standardisation

Notes

¹ We note that “stages” of treatment research need not always proceed sequentially from proof-of-concept to efficacy to effectiveness. In some cases, a pragmatically oriented study focused on an “effectiveness” question may appropriately be conducted prior to an explanatory study designed to establish the casual mechanism (Schwartz & Lellouch, 1967). Furthermore, the boundary between efficacy research and effectiveness research is not always clear (Whyte, Gordon, & Gonzalez Rothi, 2009), and these ideas may be better understood as existing on a continuum (Schwartz & Lellouch, 1967; Treweek & Zwarenstein, 2009).