The development of modern approaches to aphasia: A concise overview
International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, ISSN: 1473-5660, Vol: 38, Issue: 3, Page: 189-194
2015
- 5Citations
- 37Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The aim of this article is to review the rationale on which modern aphasia test batteries are based. Since the mid-1950s, a starting point chosen because the discipline of speech (language) pathology was created during that period, a corpus of English aphasia tests was identified through searches of electronic databases. The tests were critically evaluated in terms of their theoretical roots and influences. During the past 50 years, the fundamentals of aphasia assessment remained basically unchanged, that is, to identify and gain insight into the nature and the degree of a language disturbance. However, the way in which the assessment has taken place has shifted back and forth from a purely medical approach to a more neurolinguistic or social approach depending on the influence exerted by different scientific fields. Not a single model on which aphasia assessments rely covers the many and multifaceted problems of individuals with aphasia. At several points in time during the rehabilitation process, the clinician and the patient will encounter a crossroad, where it has to be decided which path to follow next and how to evaluate the covered path. Besides application of formal test batteries, observations in different natural settings, evaluations of functional communication and insights into psychosocial coping contribute towards a holistic approach to aphasia.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84939474582&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/mrr.0000000000000116; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25851837; http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00004356-201509000-00001; https://journals.lww.com/00004356-201509000-00001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000116; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000116; https://journals.lww.com/intjrehabilres/Abstract/2015/09000/The_development_of_modern_approaches_to_aphasia__a.1.aspx
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know