AAC apps for aphasia: a pilot study on the role of intuition and learning

References

• Laska AC, Kahan T, Hellblom A, et al. A randomized controlled trial on very early speech and language therapy in acute stroke patients with aphasia. Cerebrovasc Dis Extra. 2011;1:66–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pedersen PM, Vinter K, Olsen TS. Aphasia after stroke: type, severity and prognosis. The Copenhagen aphasia study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004;17:35–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beukelman DR, Hux K, Dietz A, et al. Using visual scene displays as communication support options for people with chronic, severe aphasia: a summary of AAC research and future research directions. Augment Altern Commun. 2015;31:234–245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purdy M, Dietz A. Factors Influencing AAC Usage by Individuals With Aphasia. Perspect Augment Altern Commun. 2010;19:70–78.
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman DR, Mirenda P. Augmentative and alternative communication: supporting children and adults with complex communication needs. 4th ed. Baltimore (MD): Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Rao PR. Drawing and gesture as communication options in a person with severe aphasia. Top Stroke Rehabil. 1995;2:49–56.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bellaire KJ, Georges JB, Thompson CK. Establishing functional communication board use for nonverbal aphasic subjects. Clin Aphasiol. 1991;19:219–227.
   Google Scholar
• Dietz A, Vannest J, Maloney T, et al. The feasibility of improving discourse in people with aphasia through AAC: clinical and functional MRI correlates. Aphasiology. 2018;32:693–719.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoover EL, Carney A. Integrating the iPad into an intensive, comprehensive aphasia program. Semin Speech Lang. 2014;35:25–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koul R, Corwin M, Nigam R, et al. Training individuals with chronic severe Broca’s aphasia to produce sentences using graphic symbols: implications for AAC intervention. J Assist Technol. 2008;2:23–34.
   Google Scholar
• Steele RD, Aftonomos LB, Koul RK. Outcome improvements in persons with chronic global aphasia following the use of a speech-generating device. Acta Neuropsychol. 2010;8:342–359.
   Google Scholar
• McNaughton D, Light J. The iPad and mobile technology revolution: benefits and challenges for individuals who require augmentative and alternative communication. Augment Altern Commun. 2013;29:107–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moffatt K, Pourshahid G, Baecker RM. Augmentative and alternative devices for aphasia: the emerging role of “smart” mobile devices. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2017;16:115–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light J, McNaughton D. The changing face of augmentative and alternative communication: past, present, and future challenges. Augment Altern Commun. 2012;28:197–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray J, Goldbart J. Augmentative and alternative communication: a review of current issues. Paediatr Child Health. 2009;19:464–468.
   Google Scholar
• Barton-Hulsey A, Wegner J, Brady NC, et al. Comparing the effects of speech-generating device display organization on symbol comprehension and use by three children with developmental delays. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017;26:227–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray J, Ball H, Goldbart J. Operational demands and representational forms. In: Murray J, Smith M, editors. The silent partner? Guildford (UK): J&R Press; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Light J, Drager K. AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: state of the science and future research directions. Augment Altern Commun. 2007;23:204–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace SE, Hux K. Effect of two layouts on high technology AAC navigation and content location by people with aphasia. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9:173–182.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Drager KDR, Light JC, Speltz JC, et al. Ther performance of typically developing 2 1/2-year-olds on dynamic display AAC technologies with different system layouts and language organization. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2003;46:298–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light JC, Wilkinson KM, Thiessen A, et al. Designing effective AAC displays for individuals with developmental or acquired disabilities: state of the science and future research directions. Augment Altern Commun. 2019;35:42–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AssistiveWare. Proloquo2Go [Mobile Application]. Version 4.4.1 (861). 2008.
   Google Scholar
• LoStraco H, Collender R, Holomany M. Speak for Yourself [Mobile Application]. Version 2.9.18 (101). 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor S, Wallace SJ, Wallace SE. High-technology augmentative and alternative communication in poststroke aphasia: a review of the factors that contribute to successful augmentative and alternative communication use. Perspect ASHA Sigs. 2019;4:464–473.
   Google Scholar
• Egan J, Worrall L, Oxenham D. Accessible Internet training package helps people with aphasia cross the digital divide. Aphasiology. 2004;18:265–280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson RK, Hough MS, King KA, et al. Functional communication in individuals with chronic severe aphasia using augmentative communication. Augment Altern Commun. 2008;24:269–280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hough M, Johnson RK. Use of AAC to enhance linguistic communication skills in an adult with chronic severe aphasia. Aphasiology. 2009;23:965–976.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koul R, Corwin M, Hayes S. Production of graphic symbol sentences by individuals with aphasia: efficacy of a computer-based augmentative and alternative communication intervention. Brain Lang. 2005;92:58–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LoStracco H. The evidence-based research behind speak for yourself 2013. Available from: https://www.speakforyourself.org/uncategorized/the-evidence-based-research-behind-speak-for-yourself/
   Google Scholar
• van de Sandt‐Koenderman WME, Wiegers J, Wielaert SM, et al. High‐tech AAC and severe aphasia: candidacy for TouchSpeak (TS). Aphasiology. 2007;21:459–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz RC, Hallowell B, Code C, et al. A multinational comparison of aphasia management practices. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2000;35:303–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackenzie C, Le May M, Lendrem W, et al. A survey of aphasia services in the United Kingdom. Eur J Disord Commun. 1993;28:43–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meder A. Mobile media devices and communication applications as a form of augmentative and alternative communication: an assessment of family wants, needs, and preferences [dissertation]. Lawrence (KS): University of Kansas; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Gentile AM. A working model of skill acquisition with application to teaching. Quest. 1972;17:3–23.
   Google Scholar
• Keele SW. Movement control in skilled motor performance. Psycho Bull. 1968;70:387–403.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson L, Read J. Do particular design features assist people with aphasia to comprehend text? An exploratory study. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2016;51:346–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartzheim DU, Nakkawita SG, Tyson CE. Navigation ease and preference of two communication applications. Poster session presented at: 18th Biennial Conference of the International Society of Augmentative and Alternative Communication; 2018 Jul 21–26; Gold Coast, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• AAC Messaging and Vocabulary [Internet]. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Available from: https://cehs.unl.edu/aac/aac-messaging-and-vocabulary/
   Google Scholar
• Wilson M. MRC psycholinguistic database: machine-usable dictionary, version 2.00. Behav Res Meth Instrum Comput. 1988;20:6–10.
   Google Scholar
• Wobbrock JO, Findlater L, Gergle D, et al., editors. The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; 2011 May; New York, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Ross I, Robert GR. A language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat. 1996;5:299.
   Google Scholar
• Saldana J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 2nd ed. Baltimore (MD): SAGE Publication; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Petroi D, Koul RK, Corwin M. Effect of number of graphic symbols, levels, and listening conditions on symbol identification and latency in persons with aphasia. Augment Altern Commun. 2014;30:40–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck AR, Bock S, Thompson JR, et al. Influence of communicative competence and augmentative and alternative communication technique on children’s attitudes toward a peer who uses AAC. AAC. 2002;18:217–227.
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman DR, Garrett KL, Yorkston KM. Augmentative communication strategies for adults with acute or chronic medical conditions. Baltimore (MD): Paul H. Brookes Pub. Co.; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Russo MJ, Prodan V, Meda NN, et al. High-technology augmentative communication for adults with post-stroke aphasia: a systematic review. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2017;14:355–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rackensperger T, Krezman C, McNaughton D, et al. “When I first got it, I wanted to throw it off a cliff”: the challenges and benefits of learning AAC technologies as described by adults who use AAC. AAC. 2005;21:165–186.
   Google Scholar