Conversational topics discussed by individuals with severe traumatic brain injury and their communication partners during sub-acute recovery

References

• Ventola E. The structure of casual conversation in English. Journal of Pragmatics 1979;3:267–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggins S, Slade D. Analysing casual conversation. New York: Cassell; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Coelho CA, Youse K, Le K. Conversational discourse in closed-head-injured and non-brain-injured adults. Aphasiology 2002;16:659–672.
   Google Scholar
• Shorland J, Douglas JM. Understanding the role of communication in maintaining and forming friendships following traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2010;24:569–580.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galski T, Tompkins C, Johnston MV. Competence in discourse as a measure of social integration and quality of life in persons with traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 1998;12:769–782.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chamberlain DJ. The experience of surviving traumatic brain injury. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2006;54:407–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ponsford J. Understanding and managing traumatic brain injury. InPsych 2012;34. Available from http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/2012/april/ponsford/.
   Google Scholar
• Snow P, Douglas JM, Ponsford J. Conversational discourse abilities following severe traumatic brain injury: a follow up study. Brain Injury 1998;12:911–935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konrad C, Geburek AJ, Rist F, Blumenroth H, Fischer B, Husstedt I, Arolt V, Schiffbauer H, Lohmann H. Long-term cognitive and emotional consequences of mild traumatic brain injury. Psychological Medicine 2011;41:1197–1211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ismail S. Medical complications, physical function and communication skills in patients with traumatic brain injury: a single centre 5-year experience. Brain Injury 2008;22:733–739.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazaux JM. Rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury in adults. Disability & Rehabilitation 1998;20:435–447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes L, Disler PB, Nair A, Wade DT. Multi-disciplinary rehabilitation for acquired brain injury in adults of working age. The Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews 2005;3:CD004170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond F, Godfrey HPD. Conversation with traumatically brain injured individuals: a controlled study of behavioural changes and their impact. Brain Injury 1997;11:319–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozeiko J, Lé K, Coelho CA. The handbook of language and speech disorders. Malden (MA): Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Snow P, Douglas JM, Ponsford J. Procedural discourse following traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology 1997;11:947–967.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho CA, Youse K, Le K, Feinn R. Narrative and conversational discourse of adults with closed head injuries and non-brain-injured adults: a discriminant analysis. Aphasiology 2003;17:499–510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mentis M, Prutting CA. Analysis of topic as illustrated in a head-injured and a normal adult. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1991;34:583–595.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coelho C, Ylvisaker M, Turkstra LS. Nonstandardized assessment approaches for individuals with traumatic brain injuries. Seminars in Speech and Language 2005;26:223–241.
   Google Scholar
• Friedland D, Miller N. Conversation analysis of communication breakdown after closed head injury. Brain Injury 1998;12:1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho CA, Liles BZ, Duffy RJ, Clarkson JV. Conversational patterns of aphasic, closed-head-injured, and normal speakers. Clinical Aphasiology 1993;21:183–192.
   Google Scholar
• Haas A, Sherman M. Conversational topic as a function of role and gender. Psychological Reports 1982;51:453–454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aries EJ, Johnson FL. Close friendship in adulthood: conversational content between same-sex friends. Sex Roles 1983;9:1183–1196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sehulster J. Things we talk about, how frequently, and to whom: frequency of topics in everyday conversation as a function of gender, age, and marital status. The American Journal of Psychology 2006;119:407–432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Body R, Parker M. Topic repetitiveness after traumatic brain injury: an emergent, jointly managed behaviour. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 2005;19:379–392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher L, Hand L, Code C. A new perspective on the relationship between communication impairment and disempowerment following head injury in information exchanges. Disability & Rehabilitation 1996;18:559–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher L, Taylor C, Aird V, Grant S. The impact of varied speaker role and communication partner on the communicative interactions of a person with traumatic brain injury: a single case study using systemic functional linguistics. Brain Impairment 2006;7:190–201.
   Google Scholar
• Tu LV, Togher L, Power E. The impact of communication partner and discourse task on a person with traumatic brain injury: the use of multiple perspectives. Brain Injury 2011;25:560–580.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher L, Hand L, Code C. Analysing discourse in the traumatic brain injury population: telephone interactions with different communication partners. Brain Injury 1997;11:169–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behn N, Togher L, Power E, Heard R. Evaluating communication training for paid carers of people with traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2012;26:1702–1715.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher L, McDonald S, Code C, Grant S. Training communication partners of people with traumatic brain injury: a randomised controlled trial. Aphasiology 2004;18:313–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher L, McDonald S, Tate R, Power E, Rietdijk R. Training communication partners of people with severe traumatic brain injury improves everyday conversations: a multicenter single blind clinical trial. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2013;45:637–645.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher L, Tate R, McDonald S, Turkstra L, Holland A, MacWhinney M. Longitudinal communication outcomes following traumatic brain injury 2010–2014.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing and Health 2000;23:334–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myburgh JA, Cooper DJ, Finfer SR, Venkatesh B, Jones D, Higgins A, Bishop N, Higlett T. Epidemiology and 12-month outcomes from traumatic brain injury in Australia and New Zealand. The Journal of Trauma 2008;64:854–862.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Helps YL, Henley G, Harrison JE. Hospital separations due to traumatic brain injury, Australia 2004-05. Injury research and statistics series number 45 (Cat no. INJCAT 116). Adelaide: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW); 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Russell WR, Smith A. Post-traumatic amnesia in closed head injury. Archives of Neurology 1961;5:4–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Bureau of Statistics. ANZSCO – Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations, 2013, Version 1.2. [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2015 March]. Available from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/PrimaryMainFeatures/1220.0?OpenDocument.
   Google Scholar
• Kertesz A. Western aphasia battery-revised. San Antonio (TX): Pearson; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Enderby P, Palmer R. Frenchay dysarthria assessment. 2nd ed. (FDA-2). Austin (TX): PRO-ED, Inc.; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas JM, O’Flaherty CA, Snow PC. Measuring perception of communicative ability: the development and evaluation of the La Trobe communication questionnaire. Aphasiology 2000;14:251–268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boles L, Bombard T. Conversational discourse analysis: appropriate and useful sample sizes. Aphasiology 1998;12:547–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AphasiaBank. Chat Transcription Training Manual. [Internet]. [cited 2014 January]. Available from http://talkbank.org/APhasiaBank/manuals/training.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Saffran EM, Berndt RS, Schwartz MF. The quantitative analysis of agrammatic production: procedure and data. Brain and Language 1989;37:440–479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today 2004;24:105–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2008;62:107–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandelowski M. Theory unmasked: the uses and guises of theory in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health 1993;16:213–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2007;19:349–357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brinton B, Fujiki M. Development of topic manipulation skills in discourse. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1984;27:350–358.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maxwell JA. Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Education Review 1992;62:279–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milne J, Oberle K. Enhancing rigor in qualitative description: a case study. Journal of Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nursing 2005;32:413–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber RP. Basic content analysis. California: Sage Publications; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Carcary M. The research audit trial – enhancing trustworthiness in qualitative inquiry. Journal of Business Research Methods 2009;7:11–24.
   Google Scholar
• Perkins MR, Body R, Parker M. Closed head injury: assessment and remediation of topic bias and repetitiveness. In: Perkins MR, Howard S, editors. Case studies in clinical linguistics. London: Whurr Publishers Ltd; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Vakil E. The effect of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) on different aspects of memory: a selective review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 2005;27:977–1021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentleman D. Rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury. Trauma 2001;3:193–204.
   Google Scholar
• Kersel DA, Marsh NV, Havill JH, Sleigh JW. Neuropsychological functioning during the year following severe traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2001;15:283–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombovy ML, Olek AC. Recovery and rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 1997;11:305–318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho CA. Management of discourse deficits following traumatic brain injury: progress, caveats, and needs. Seminars in Speech and Language 2007;28:122–135.
   Google Scholar