Discourse level reading comprehension interventions following acquired brain injury: a systematic review

References

• Malec JF, Smigielski JS, DePompolo RW, et al. Outcome evaluation and prediction in a comprehensive-integrated post-acute outpatient brain injury rehabilitation programme. Brain Inj. 1993;7:15–29.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Laatsch L, Guay J. Rehabilitation of reading comprehension fluency in adults with acquired brain injury. J Cognit Rehabil. 2005;23:5–12.
   Google Scholar
• McNamara DS. Reading comprehension strategies: theories, interventions and technologies. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Snow C. Reading for understanding: toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica (CA): RAND Corporation, Library of Congress; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Ciuffreda KJ, Han Y, Kapoor N, et al. Oculomotor rehabilitation for reading in acquired brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation. 2006;21:9–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapoor N, Ciuffreda KJ, Han Y. Oculomotor rehabilitation in acquired brain injury: a case series. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1667–1678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollock A, Hazelton C, Henderson C, et al. Interventions for visual field defects in patients with stroke (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;10:CD008388.
   Google Scholar
• Ferstl EC, Guthke T, von Cramon DY. Text comprehension after brain injury: left prefrontal lesions affect inference processes. Neuropsychology. 2002;16:292–308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sohlberg MM, McLaughlin KA, Pavese A, et al. Evaluation of attention process training and brain injury education in persons with acquired brain injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2000;22:656–676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiran S, Sandberg C. Treating communication problems in individuals with disordered language. In: Peach RK, Shapiro LP, editors. Cognition and acquired language disorders. St. Louis (MO): Elsevier; 2012. p. 298–325.
   Google Scholar
• Holliday R, Hamilton S, Luthra A, et al. Text comprehension after traumatic brain injury: missing the gist? Brain Lang. 2005;95:74–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald S, Wiseman-Hakes C. Knowledge translation in ABI rehabilitation: a model for consolidating and applying the evidence for cognitive-communication interventions. Brain Inj. 2010;24:486–508.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meteyard L, Bruce C, Edmundson A, et al. Profiling text comprehension impairments in aphasia. Aphasiology. 2015;29:1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim M, Russo S. Multiple oral rereading (MOR) treatment: who is it for? Contemp Issues Commun Sci Disord. 2010;37:58–68.
   Google Scholar
• Halper AS, Cherney LR, Miller TK. Clinical management of communication problems in adults with traumatic brain injury. Gaithersberg (MD): Aspen Publications; 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Sarno MT. The nature of verbal impairment after closed head injury. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1980;168:685–692.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarno MT, Buonaguro A, Levita E. Characteristics of verbal impairment in closed head injured patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1986;67:400–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickels L. Reading too little into reading?: strategies in the rehabilitation of acquired dyslexia. Eur J Disord Commun. 1995;30:37–50.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byng S. Sentence processing deficits: theory and therapy. Cognit Neuropsychol. 1988;5:629–676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall J. The mapping hypothesis and aphasia therapy. Aphasiology. 1995;9:517–539.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beeson PM, Insalaco D. Acquired alexia: lessons from successful treatment. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1998;4:621–635.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickels L, Byng S, Black M. Sentence processing deficits: a replication of therapy. Br J Disord Commun. 1991;26:175–199.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ryan TV, Sautter SW, Capps CF, et al. Utilizing neuropsychological measures to predict vocational outcome in a head trauma population. Brain Inj. 1992;6:175–182.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kaplan CP. Differential reading recovery in patients with severe to moderate closed head injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1990;69:297–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiel A, Burn J, Henry D, et al. The effects of increased rehabilitation therapy after brain injury: results of a prospective controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2001;15:501–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leon-Carrion J, Dominguez-Morales MR, Barroso Y, et al. Recovery of cognitive function during comprehensive rehabilitation after severe traumatic brain injury. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44:505–511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho CA, DeRuyter F, Stein M. Treatment efficacy: cognitive-communicative disorders resulting from traumatic brain injury in adults. J Speech Hearing Res. 1996;39:S5–S17.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blake ML, Frymark TB, Venedictov R. An evidence-based systematic review on communication treatments for individuals with right hemisphere brain damage. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2013;22:146–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann A. Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago Functional Assessment Scales (RIC-FAS). Chicago (IL): Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Cicerone KD, Dahlberg C, Kalmar K, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: recommendations for clinical practice. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:1596–1615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicerone KD, Dahlberg C, Malec JF, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 1998 through 2002. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1681–1692.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicerone KD, Langenbahn DM, Braden C, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 2003 through 2008. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:519–530.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brady M, Kelly H, Godwin J, et al. Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;5:CD000425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perdices M, Savage S, Tate RL, et al. Rater’s manual for between-group studies (RCTs and NonRCTs). Introduction to the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Scale for rating methodological quality. Adapted for PsycBITE (PEDro-P). Sydney: University of Sydney; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Tate RL, Mcdonald S, Perdices M, et al. Rating the methodological quality of single-subject designs and n-of-1 trials: introducing the Single-Case Experimental Design (SCED) Scale. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2008;18:385–401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate RL, Perdices M, Rosenkoetter U, et al. Revision of a method quality rating scale for single-case experimental designs and n-of-1 trials: The 15-item Risk of Bias in N-of-1 Trials (RoBiNT) Scale. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2013;23:619–638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherney LR, Merbitz CT, Grip JC. Efficacy of oral reading in aphasia treatment outcome. Rehabil Lit. 1986;47:112–118.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cherney LR, Small SL. Task-dependent changes in brain activation following therapy for nonfluent aphasia: discussion of two individual cases. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006;12:828–842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherney LR. Oral Reading for Language in Aphasia (ORLA): evaluating the efficacy of computer-delivered therapy in chronic nonfluent aphasia. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2010;17:423–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherney LR. Oral reading for language in aphasia: impact of aphasia severity on cross-modal outcomes in chronic nonfluent aphasia. Semin Speech Lang. 2010;31:42–51.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gold PC, Freeman EA. Remediation of alexia: a case study. Read Psychol. 1984;5:65–73.
   Google Scholar
• Dietz A, Hux K, McKelvey ML, et al. Reading comprehension by people with chronic aphasia: a comparison of three levels of visuographic contextual support. Aphasiology. 2009;23:1053–1064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey J, Hux K, Snell J. Using text-to-speech reading support for an adult with mild aphasia and cognitive impairment. Commun Disord Quart. 2013;35:39–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz RC, Wertz RT. Computerized hierarchical reading treatment in aphasia. Aphasiology. 1992;6:165–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz RC, Wertz RT. The efficacy of computer-provided reading treatment for chronic aphasic adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997;40:493–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch KE, Damico JS, Damico HL, et al. Reading skills in an individual with Aphasia: the usefulness of meaning-based clinical applications. Asia Pac J Speech Lang Hear. 2009;12:221–234.
   Google Scholar
• Webster J, Morris J, Connor C, et al. Text level reading comprehension in aphasia: what do we know about therapy and what do we need to know? Aphasiology. 2013;27:1362–1380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cocks N, Pritchard M, Cornish H, et al. A “novel” reading therapy programme for reading difficulties after a subarachnoid haemorrhage. Aphasiology. 2013;27:509–531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey J, Hux K, Scott N, et al. Text-to-speech technology effects on reading rate and comprehension by adults with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2013;27:1388–1394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laatsch L, Little D, Thulborn K. Changes in fMRI following cognitive rehabilitation in severe traumatic brain injury: a case study. Rehabil Psychol. 2004;49:262–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laatsch L, Krisky C. Changes in fMRI activation following rehabilitation of reading and visual processing deficits in subjects with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2006;20:1367–1375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sohlberg MM, Griffiths GG, Fickas S. An evaluation of reading comprehension of expository text in adults with traumatic brain injury. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2014;23:160–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths GG, Sohlberg MM, Kirk C, et al. Evaluation of use of reading comprehension strategies to improve reading comprehension of adult college students with acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2015. DOI: 10.1080/09602011.2015.1007878. [Epub ahead of print].
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey J, Hux K. Text-to-speech accommodations for the reading challenges of adults with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2015;29:888–897.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cocks N, Matthews N, Barnett L, et al. Functional reading therapy for individuals with acquired reading difficulties: a preliminary investigation exploring its effectiveness. Aust Commun Quart. 2010;12:37–41.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer JF, Murray LL. Approaches to the treatment of alexia in chronic aphasia. Aphasiology. 2002;16:727–743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penn C, Jones D, Joffe V. Hierarchical discourse therapy: a method for the mild patient. Aphasiology. 1997;11:601–613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogalski Y, Edmonds LA. Attentive reading and constrained summarisation (ARCS) treatment in primary progressive aphasia: a case study. Aphasiology. 2008;22:763–775.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs JB, Collins KF. Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy (structure of the observed learning outcome). New York: Academic Press; 1982.
   Google Scholar
• Scott B. Readability Formulas. [Internet]. [cited 2015 Nov 11]. Available from: http://www.readabilityformulas.com.
   Google Scholar
• Parker DH, Scannell G. Scientific Research Associates reading laboratory 1C. Columbus (OH): McGraw-Hill; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• LaPointe L, Horner J. Reading comprehension battery for aphasia-2. Austin (TX): Pro-Ed; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Kertesz A. Western aphasia battery. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich; 1982.
   Google Scholar
• Porch BE. Porch index of communicative ability. 3rd ed. Palo Alto (CA): Consulting Psychologists Press; 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Manzel K, Tranel D. Development and standardization of a reading test for brain-damaged patients. Dev Neuropsychol. 1999;15:407–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiederholt JL, Bryant BR. Gray oral reading tests. 4th ed. Austin (TX): Pro-Ed; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Carlisle J. The use of the sentence verification technique in diagnostic assessment of listening and reading comprehension. Learn Disabil Res. 1989;5:33–44.
   Google Scholar
• Hinchliffe F, Murdoch B, Chenery H. Towards a conceptualization of language and cognitive impairment in closed-head injury: use of clinical measures. Brain Inj. 1998;12:109–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinotte MP, Coelho CA. Attention training for reading impairment in mild aphasia: a follow-up study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2007;22:303–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellard DF, Fall E, Woods KL. A path analysis of reading comprehension for adults with low literacy. J Learn Disabil. 2010;43:154–165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehren BJ. Looking for evidence-based practice in reading comprehension instruction. Top Lang Disord. 2005;25:310–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkeley S, Mastropieri MA, Scruggs TE. Reading comprehension strategy instruction and attribution retraining for secondary students with learning and other mild disabilities. J Learn Disabil. 2011;44:18–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowe LK. Comparison of two reading feedback strategies in improving the oral and written language performance of children with language-learning disabilities. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2003;12:16–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gajria M, Jitendra AK, Sood S, et al. Improving comprehension of expository text in students with LD: a research synthesis. J Learn Disabil. 2007;40:210–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guthrie JT, McRae A, Coddington CS, et al. Impacts of comprehensive reading instruction on diverse outcomes of low- and high-achieving readers. J Learn Disabil. 2009;42:195–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim A, Vaughn S, Wanzek J, et al. Graphic organizers and their effects on the reading comprehension of students with LD: a synthesis of research. J Learn Disabil. 2004;37:105–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lovett MW, Lacerenza L, Palma MD, et al. Evaluating the efficacy of remediation for struggling readers in high school. J Learn Disabil. 2011;45:151–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan MF, Moni KB, Jobling A. Who? Where? What? When? Why? How? Question words – what do they mean? Brit J Learn Disabil. 2009;37:178–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Reports of the subgroups. Washington (DC): National Institution of Child Health and Human Development, US Department of Education; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman C, Lindstrom J, Nelson J, et al. Passageless comprehension on the Nelson–Denny Reading Test: well above chance for university students. J Learn Disabil. 2010;43:244–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown J, Fishco V, Hanna G. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Geneva: Riverside Publishing Company; 1993.
   Google Scholar