Professional interactional practices in dementia care

References

• Alzheimerforeningen, editor. Forstå demens. 2nd ed. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag og Alzheimerforeningen; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Hasselbach SG, Stokholm J. Demenssygdomme. In: Arndal A, Hasselbach SG, Lolk A, editors. Forstå demens. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag; 2011. p. 53–80.
   Google Scholar
• Kempler D. Language changes in dementia of the Alzheimer type. In: Lubinski R, Orange JB, Henderson D, Stecker N, editors. Dementia and Communication. Philadelphia, Hamilton: B.C. Decker Inc.; 1995. p. 98–114.
   Google Scholar
• Bayles KA, Tomoeda CK, editors. Assessment of Cognitive-Communication Disorders of Dementia. Cognitive-Communication Disorders of Dementia. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2007. p. 139–166.
   Google Scholar
• Laine M, Laakso M, Vuorinen E, et al. Coherence and informativeness of discourse in two dementia types. J Neurol. 1998;11:79–87.
   Google Scholar
• March EG, Wales R, Pattison P. The uses of nouns and deixis in discourse production in Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol. 2006;19:311–340.
   Google Scholar
• Perkins L, Whitworth A, Lesser R. Conversing in dementia: a conversation analytic approach. J Neurol. 1998;11:33–53.
   Google Scholar
• Mikesell L. Conversational practices of a frontotemporal dementia patient and his interlocutors. Res Lang Soc Inter. 2009;42:135–162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen G, Drew P. ‘Singing’ as an interactional resource for people with dementia. Conference: Life With Dementia; 2016 Oct 12–14; Norrköping
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton HE. Conversations with an Alzheimer’s patient: An interactional sociolinguistic study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Lubinski R, Orange JB, Henderson D, et al. editors. Dementia and Communication. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Jones D. A family living with Alzheimer's disease: the communicative challenges. Dementia. 2013;0:1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Lindholm C. Challenges and opportunities of group conversations: the day care center as a communication Milieu. In: Davis B, Guendouzi J, editors. Pragmactis in Dementia Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing; 2013. p. 205–237.
   Google Scholar
• Majlesi AR, Ekström A. Baking together-the coordination of actions in activities involving people with dementia. J Aging Stud. 2016;38:37–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mates AW, Mikesell L, Smith MS. Language, interaction, and frontotemporal dementia: reverse engineering the social mind. London: Equinox; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Mikesell L. Repetitional responses in frontotemporal dementia discourse: asserting agency or demonstrating confusion. Discourse Stud. 2010;12:465–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabat SR. Facilitating conversation with and Alzheimer's disease sufferer through the use of indirect repair. In: Hamilton H, editor. Language and Communication in Old Age: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Issues in Aging. Garland Press; 1999. p. 115–131.
   Google Scholar
• Samuelsson C, Ekström A, Majlesi AR, et al. Kommunikation vid demens. In: Hellström I, Hydén L-C, editors. Att leva med demens: Gleerups Utbildning AB; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Deppermann A, editor. Conversation analytic studies of multimodal interaction. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Haddington P, Keisanen T, Mondada L, et al. editors. Beyond multitasking. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada L. Multimodal completions. In: Deppermann A, Günther S, editors. Temporality in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2015. p. 257–307.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen G, Hazel S, Mortensen K. A body of resources - CA studies in social conduct. J Pragma. 2014;65:
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks H, Schegloff E, Jefferson G. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. 1974;50:696–735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard DW, Marlaire CL. Good reasons for bad testing performance: the interactional substrate of educational exams. Qual Sociol. 1992;15:177–202.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen G. Repeated use of request for confirmation in atypical interaction. Clini Linguist Phon. 2016;30:
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson R, Bryan K, Lock S, et al. Therapy using conversation analysis: helping couples adapt to aphasia in conversation. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1998;33:144–149.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kitwood T. Towards a theory of dementia care: the interpersonal process. Age Soc. 1993;13:51–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manthorpe J, Samsi K. Person-centered dementia care: current perspectives. CIA. 2016;11:1733–1740.
   Google Scholar
• Clare L. Rehabilitation for people living with dementia: a practical framework of positive support. PLoS Med. 2007;14:
   Google Scholar
• Leplege A, Gzil F, Cammelli M, et al. Person-centredness: conceptual and historical perspectives. Disabil Rehab. 2007;29:1555–1565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dean SG, Siegert RJ, Taylor WJ. Interprofessional rehabilitation: a person-centred approach. John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Ravn MB, Petersen KS, Thuesen J. Rehabilitation for people living with dementia: a systematic review of processes and outcomes. (forth).
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley AD, Hitch GJ. Developments in the concept of working memory. Neuropsychology. 1994;8:485–493.
   Google Scholar
• Bäckmann L, Mäntylä T, Herlitz A. The optimization of episodic remembering in old age. In: Baltes PB, Baltes MM, editors. Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1990. p. 118–163.
   Google Scholar
• Viskontas IV, Possin KL, Miller BL. Symptoms of Frontotemporal dementia provide insights into orbitofrontal cortex function and social behavior. An New York Acad Sci. 2007;1121:528–545.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Claire L. Neuropsychological rehabilitation and people with dementia. New York: Psychology Press; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Thuesen J, Kristensen F, Frausing S, et al. Rehabilitering ved demens i let til moderat grad. National kortlaegning af forståelser, indsatser og organisering i regioner og kommuner. Nyborg: REHPA Videncenter for Rehabilitering og Palliation, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Bayles KA, Kim ES. Improving the functioning of individuals with Alzheimer’s disease: emergence of behavioral interventions. J Commun Dis. 2003;36:327–343.
   Google Scholar
• Conroy P, Ralph MAL. Overviews and ways forward for future research. Neuropsychol Rehab. 2012;22:319–328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creighton A, Davison TE, van der Ploeg ES, et al. Using spaced retrieval training to teach people with dementia to independently use their walking aids: two case studies. Clin Gerontol. 2015;38:170–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan KJ, Copland DA, van Hees SJ, et al. Semantic feature training for the treatment of anomia in Alzheimer's disease. A preliminary investigation. Cognitive Behav Neurol. 2016;29:32–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jokel R, Anderson ND. Quest for the best: effects of errorless and active encoding on word-relearning in semantic dementia. Neuropsychol Rehab. 2012;22:187–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitwood T. Positive long-terms changes in dementia: some priliminary observations. J Mental Health. 1995;4:133–144.
   Google Scholar
• Mahendra N, Arkin S. Effects of four years of exercise, language, and social interventions on Alzheimer discourse. J Commun Dis. 2003;36:395–422.
   Google Scholar
• Wu H-S, Lin L-C, Su S-C, et al. The effects of spaced retrieval combined with errorless learning in institutionalized Elders with Dementia: recall performance, cognitive status, and food intake. Alzheimer Disease Assoc Disor. 2014;28:333–339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark A. Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Kitzinger C. After post-cognitivism. Discourse Studies. 2006;8:67–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelsson C, Ekström A, Ferm U. The use communication aids in interaction with people with dementia: managing varying knowledge. Living the material world. Kolding, Denmark: IIEMCA University of Southern Denmark; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Bier N, Brambati S, Macoir J, et al. Relying on procedural memory to enhance independence in daily living activities: smartphone use in a case of semantic dementia. Neuropsychol Rehab. 2015;
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahendra N. Direct interventions for improving the performance of individuals with Alzheimer's disease. Semin Speech Lang. 2001;22:291–304.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Säljö R. Lärande och kulturella redskap. Om lärprocesser och det kollektiva minnet. Stockholm: Norstedts Akademiska Förlag; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch JV. Voices of the mind: A sociolcultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Glisky EL, Schacter DL, Tulving E. Computer learning by memory-impaired patients: acquisition and retention of complex knowledge. Neuropsychologia. 1986;24:313–328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coulter A. Patient engagement-what works? J Ambul Care Manage. 2012;35:80–89.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carman K, Dardess P, Maurer M, et al. Patient and family engagement: a framework for understanding the elements and developing interventions and policies. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:223–231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller LM, Whitlatch CJ, Lyons KS. Shared decision-making in dementia: a review of patient and family carer involvement. Dementia (London). 2016;15:1141–1157.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams CL. What spouse caregivers know about communication in Alzheimer's disease: development of the AD communication knowledge test. Mental Health Nursing. 2011;32:28–34.
   Google Scholar
• Maynard DW, Clayman SE. The diversity of ethnomethodology. Annu Rev Sociol. 1991;17:385–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garfinkel H. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1967.
   Google Scholar
• Liberman K. More Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: State University of New York Press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Psathas G. Conversation Analysis. The Study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks: SAGE PUBLICATIONS; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks H. Lectures on Conversation. Jefferson G, editor. Oxford: Blackwell; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks H. An analysis of the course of a joke's telling in conversation. In: Bauman R, Sherzer J, editors. Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1974. p. 337–353.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff E. Identification and recognition in telephone openings. In: Psathas G, editor. Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Erlbaum; 1979. p. 23–78.
   Google Scholar
• Button G. On varieties of closings. In: Psathas G, editor. Interactional Competence. Lanham: University Press of America; 1990. p. 93–148.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff E, Sacks H. Opening up closings. Semiotica. 1973;8:289–327.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson G. Exposed and embedded corrections. In: Button G, Lee JRE, editors. Talk and Social Organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage J, Maynard DW, editors. Communication in Medical Care. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Brouwer CE. Talking 'cognition' in the audiology clinic. In: Rasmussen G, Brouwer CE, Day D, editors. Evaluating Cognitive Competences in Interaction. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Atkinson JM, Drew P. Order in Court: the Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London: Macmillan; 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Hellermann J. Social actions for classroom learning. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• De Stefani E, Gazin A-D. Instructional sequences in driving lessons: Mobile participants and the temporal and sequential organization of actions. In: Rasmussen G, Hazel S, Mortensen K, editors. A body of resources - CA studies of social conduct. Amsterdam: ELSEVIER; 2014. p. 63–79.
   Google Scholar
• Vom Lehn D. Withdrawing from exhibits: the interactional organisation of museum visits. In: Haddington P, Mondada L, Nevile M, editors. Interaction and Mobility: Language and the Body in Motion. Berlin: De Gruyter; 2013. p. 65–90.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks H. The inference-making machine. In: Jefferson G, editor. Harvey Sacks Lectures on conversation, Part I. Oxford UK & Cambridge USA: Blackwell; 1965/1995. p. 113–125.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff E, Jefferson G, Sacks H. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair for conversation. Language. 1977;53:361–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff E. On the organization of sequences as a source of "Coherence" in talk-in-interaction. In: Dorval B, editor. Conversational Organization and its Development. Norwood: Ablex Publishing; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Ten Have P. Doing Conversation Analysis. A practical guide. London: Sage; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks H. On sampling and subjectivity. In: Jefferson G, editor. Harvey Sacks Lectures on Conversation. Part III. Oxford UK & Cambridge USA: Blackwell; 1966/1995. p. 483–488.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz A. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In: Atkinson JM, Heritage J, editors. Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984. p. 57–101.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz A, Heritage J. Preference. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. p. 210–228.
   Google Scholar