Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective

To establish international, multidisciplinary expert consensus on minimum participant characteristic reporting standards in aphasia research (DESCRIBE project).

Methods

An international, three-round e-Delphi exercise and consensus meeting, involving multidisciplinary researchers, clinicians and journal editors working academically or clinically in the field of aphasia.

Results

Round 1 of the DESCRIBE e-Delphi exercise (n = 156) generated 113 items, 20 of which reached consensus by round 3. The final consensus meeting (n = 19 participants) established DESCRIBE's 14 participant characteristics that should be reported in aphasia studies: age; years of education; biological sex; language of treatment/testing; primary language; languages used; history of condition(s) known to impact communication/cognition; history of previous stroke; lesion hemisphere; time since onset of aphasia; conditions arising from the neurological event; and, for communication partner participants, age, biological sex and relationship to person with aphasia. Each characteristic has been defined and matched with standard response options to enable consistent reporting.

Conclusion

Aphasia research studies should report the 14 DESCRIBE participant characteristics as a minimum. Consistent adherence to the DESCRIBE minimum reporting standard will reduce research wastage and facilitate evidence-based aphasia management by enabling replication and collation of research findings, and translation of evidence into practice.

Keywords

Reporting standards participant characteristics aphasia stroke treatment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Pedersen

Stig Jørgensen

Nakayama

, et al. Aphasia in acute stroke: incidence, determinants, and recovery. Ann Neurol: Off J Am Neurol Assoc Child Neurol Soc 1995; 38: 659–666.

Wray

Clarke

. Longer-term needs of stroke survivors with communication difficulties living in the community: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. BMJ Open 2017; 7: e017944–e017944.

Lam

Wodchis

. The relationship of 60 disease diagnoses and 15 conditions to preference-based health-related quality of life in Ontario hospital-based long-term care residents. Med Care 2010; 48(4): 380–387.

Williams

Ali

VandenBerg

, et al. Utilising a systematic review-based approach to create a database of individual participant data for meta- and network meta-analyses: the RELEASE database of aphasia after stroke. Aphasiology 2021: 1–21. DOI: 10.1080/02687038.2021.1897081.

Glasziou

Altman

Bossuyt

, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. The Lancet 2014; 383: 267–276.

Foster

Worrall

Rose

, et al. ‘That doesn’t translate’: the role of evidence-based practice in disempowering speech pathologists in acute aphasia management. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2015; 50: 547–563.

Brookshire

. Subject description and generality of results in experiments with aphasic adults. J Speech Hear Disord 1983; 48: 342–346.

Roberts

Code

McNeil

. Describing participants in aphasia research: part 1. Audit of current practice. Aphasiology 2003; 17: 911–932.

Meyer

Selb

Kiekens

, et al. Toward better reporting standards of patients’ characteristics in rehabilitation trials: applying a new conceptual framework to current standards. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2020; 99: 216–223.

10.

Delbecq

Van de Ven

Gustafson

. Group techniques for program planning: a guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman, 1975, p.174.

11.

Wallace

Worrall

Rose

, et al. A core outcome set for aphasia treatment research: the ROMA consensus statement. Int J Stroke 2019; 14: 180–185.

12.

Donohoe

Stellefson

Tennant

. Advantages and limitations of the e-Delphi technique. Am J Health Educ 2012; 43: 38–46.

13.

Graneheim

Lundman

. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004; 24: 105–112.

14.

Guyatt

Oxman

Vist

, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Br Med J 2008; 336: 24.

15.

Brady

Ali

VandenBerg

, et al.. RELEASE: a protocol for a systematic review based, individual participant data, meta- and network meta-analysis, of complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia. Aphasiology 34(2): 137–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1643003

16.

Seghier

Patel

Prejawa

, et al. The PLORAS database: a data repository for predicting language outcome and recovery after stroke. Neuroimage 2016; 124: 1208–1212.

17.

Mirman

Strauss

Brecher

, et al. A large, searchable, web-based database of aphasic performance on picture naming and other tests of cognitive function. Cogn Neuropsychol 2010; 27: 495–504.

18.

Foulkes

Wolf

Price

, et al. The stroke data bank: design, methods, and baseline characteristics. Stroke 1988; 19: 547–554.

19.

Moher

Schulz

Altman

. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 2001; 357: 1191–1194.

20.

Ali

VandenBerg

Williams

, et al. Predictors of poststroke aphasia recovery. Stroke 2021; 52: 1778–1787.

21.

Kaiser

Haller

Schmitz

, et al. On sex/gender related similarities and differences in fMRI language research. Brain Res Rev 2009; 61: 49–59.

22.

Brady

Ali

VandenBerg

, et al. Precision rehabilitation for aphasia by patient age, sex, aphasia severity, and time since stroke? A prespecified, systematic review-based, individual participant data, network, subgroup meta-analysis. Int J Stroke 2022: 17474930221097477. https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930221097477.

23.

González-Fernández

Davis

Molitoris

, et al. Formal education, socioeconomic status, and the severity of aphasia after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92: 1809–1813.

24.

Paradis M. Bilingual and polyglot aphasia. In: RS Berndt (ed.), Handbook of neuropsychology: Language and aphasia. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 2001, pp. 69–91.

25.

Bialystok

Craik

FIM

Luk

. Bilingualism: consequences for mind and brain. Trends Cogn Sci 2012; 16: 240–250.

26.

Paplikar

Mekala

Bak

, et al. Bilingualism and the severity of poststroke aphasia. Aphasiology 2019; 33: 58–72.

27.

Mooijman

Schoonen

Roelofs

, et al. Executive control in bilingual aphasia: a systematic review. Biling: Lang Cogn 2021: 1–16. DOI: 10.1017/S136672892100047X.

28.

Hope

Parker

Grogan

, et al. Comparing language outcomes in monolingual and bilingual stroke patients. Brain 2015; 138: 1070–1083.

29.

Jørgensen

Nakayama

Reith

, et al. Stroke recurrence: predictors, severity, and prognosis. The Copenhagen stroke study. Neurology 1997; 48: 891–895.

30.

Brady

Kelly

Godwin

, et al. Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016.

31.

Watila

Balarabe

. Factors predicting post-stroke aphasia recovery. J Neurol Sci 2015; 352: 12–18.

32.

Aguilar

Kerry

Ong

Y-H

, et al. Lesion-site-dependent responses to therapy after aphasic stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2018; 89: 1352–1354.

33.

El Hachioui

Lingsma

van de Sandt-Koenderman

, et al. Long-term prognosis of aphasia after stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2013; 84: 310–315.

34.

Copland

. Elizabeth Usher Memorial Lecture: lost in translation? Challenges and future prospects for a neurobiological approach to aphasia rehabilitation. Int J Speech Lang Pathol 2020; 22: 270–280.

35.

Dignam

Copland

O’Brien

, et al. Influence of cognitive ability on therapy outcomes for anomia in adults with chronic poststroke aphasia. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2017; 60: 406–421.

36.

Kauhanen

M-L

Korpelainen

Hiltunen

, et al. Aphasia, depression, and non-verbal cognitive impairment in ischaemic stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis 2000; 10: 455–461.

37.

Shrubsole

Worrall

Power

, et al. Recommendations for post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation: an updated systematic review and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines. Aphasiology 2017; 31: 1–24.

38.

Greenwood

Mackenzie

Cloud

, et al. Informal carers of stroke survivors–factors influencing carers: a systematic review of quantitative studies. Disabil Rehabil 2008; 30: 1329–1349.

39.

Turner

Whitworth

. Conversational partner training programmes in aphasia: a review of key themes and participants’ roles. Aphasiology 2006; 20: 483–510.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

0.08 MB

Establishing reporting standards for participant characteristics in post-stroke aphasia research: An international e-Delphi exercise and consensus meeting

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material