Concurrent Validity and Reliability of the Core Lexicon Measure as a Measure of Word Retrieval Ability in Aphasia Narratives

A preliminary investigation on core lexicon analysis in dementia of the Alzheimer's type

BACKGROUND

Core lexicon (CL) analysis is a time efficient and possibly reliable measure that captures discourse production abilities. For people with aphasia, CL scores have demonstrated correlations with aphasia severity, as well as other discourse and linguistic measures. It was also found to be clinician-friendly and clinically sensitive enough to capture longitudinal changes in aphasia. To our knowledge, CL has never been investigated in individuals with neurologically progressive disease.

AIMS

As a preliminary investigation, we sought to investigate (1) whether CL scores correlate with dementia severity, (2) whether CL scores correlate with measures of discourse quality, and (3) whether CL scores correlate with other measures of lexical/semantic access.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Twelve participants with a cognitive impairment associated with dementia of the Alzheimer's type (DAT) completed several measures of language and cognitive ability, as well as provide a language sample from the wordless picture book, Picnic.

RESULTS & CONCLUSION

Results are informative, as they provide insight into characteristics of CL and provide support for potential use of CL in individuals with neurologically progressive disease. The results indicated that CL scores do correlate with dementia severity and several measures of language ability, indicating they may provide a useful measure of language abilities in DAT, but more research is needed.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Core lexicon (CL) analysis is an assessment measure of discourse ability, most closely related to informativeness or productivity, used in aphasiology that is easier to use and less time consuming than previous measures of informativeness, such as correct information units or type-token ratio (TTR). For people with aphasia, CL analysis correlates with aphasia severity, measures of informativeness, as well as other measures of discourse quality. It has also been shown to be faster and more reliable between scorers than other informativeness measures. What this study adds Core lexicon analysis is a new simple and online method for assessing the informativeness of a discourse sample without the need to record or transcribe the language sample. CL is receiving a lot of attention in aphasia, correlating with everything from aphasia severity to measures of productivity and lexical access, as well as measures of informativeness. Unfortunately, no one has investigated CL analysis in dementia. The study demonstrates the first evidence that CL analysis may be a useful measure for determining dementia severity and language quality in people with dementia. What are the clinical implications of this work? Core lexicon analysis may provide clinicians and researchers with an easy method for assessing the discourse of people with a cognitive impairment associated with dementia of the Alzheimer's type. This will improve initial assessment, as well as improve ongoing language assessment that may provide clues into their functional ability to communicate effectively.

The Case of the Cookie Jar: Differences in Typical Language Use in Dementia

Background

Findings from language sample analyses can provide efficient and effective indicators of cognitive impairment in older adults.

Objective

This study used newly automated core lexicon analyses of Cookie Theft picture descriptions to assess differences in typical use across three groups.

Methods

Participants included adults without diagnosed cognitive impairments (Control), adults diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (ProbableAD), and adults diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Cookie Theft picture descriptions were transcribed and analyzed using CLAN.

Results

Results showed that the ProbableAD group used significantly fewer core lexicon words overall than the MCI and Control groups. For core lexicon content words (nouns, verbs), however, both the MCI and ProbableAD groups produced significantly fewer words than the Control group. The groups did not differ in their use of core lexicon function words. The ProbableAD group was also slower to produce most of the core lexicon words than the MCI and Control groups. The MCI group was slower than the Control group for only two of the core lexicon content words. All groups mentioned a core lexicon word in the top left quadrant of the picture early in the description. The ProbableAD group was then significantly slower than the other groups to mention a core lexicon word in the other quadrants.

Conclusions

This standard and simple-to-administer task reveals group differences in overall core lexicon scores and the amount of time until the speaker produces the key items. Clinicians and researchers can use these tools for both early assessment and measurement of change over time.

Core lexicon in aphasia: A longitudinal study

Background

General consensus exists between clinicians as to the incorporation of discourse outcome measures into language assessment for persons with aphasia (PWA). The development of core lexicon measures (CoreLex) has enabled clinicians to reduce time and labor intensive preparatory work for discourse analysis, which has been considered as an alternative measure to quantify word retrieval ability in discourse in a clinical context. Although previous studies have investigated the quality of the measure, CoreLex has rarely been longitudinally explored.

Aims

We aimed to investigate the adequacy of CoreLex to document linguistic changes in PWA over time. Specifically, we examined (1) whether natural language recovery from acute to chronic stages is manifested differentially by tasks and (2) the extent to which the ability to retrieve words in isolation predicts the ability to retrieve words in context.

Methods

A total of 19 PWA participated in the study. They completed a language assessment including confrontation naming tasks (Boston Naming Test [BNT] and Hopkins Action Naming Assessment [HANA]) and a picture description task using the Cookie Theft picture at acute and chronic stages. Discourse samples from the picture description task were quantified using CoreLex.

Results

We found significant differences across tasks and time-points by PWA. Moderate correlations between the confrontation naming tasks and CoreLex were found at the acute stage but not at the chronic stage. Additionally, McNemar's tests demonstrated a significant difference in PWA's performance in CoreLex from the acute to the chronic stages.

Conclusions

Our findings show that performance by PWA improves over time on all tasks, but language gains are manifested differentially by tasks. Performance in confrontation naming moderately predicts word retrieval in context acutely. However, lack of correlations between confrontation naming tasks and CoreLex later endorse inadequacy of using confrontation naming tasks as a proxy measure for discourse-level performance and improvement for PWA.

Quality of Measurement in Core Lexicon Measures

PURPOSE

Core lexicon measures have received growing attention in research. They are intended to provide clinicians with a clinician-friendly means to quantify word retrieval ability in discourse based on normal expectations of discourse production for specific discourse elicitation tasks. To date, different criteria have been used to develop core lexicon measures by groups of researchers. The need for statistical guidance in pursuit of the psychologically robust measure has been recognized.

AIMS

This study was to investigate the best criterion for accurate measurement. Specifically, we focused on two criteria (frequency vs. percentage) that have previously been used for the development of core lexicon measures.

METHOD

Core lexicon measures consisting of five different checklists by word class (verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, and function words) and developed by the two criteria were applied to language samples produced by 470 cognitively healthy adults. Performance in word retrieval ability at the discourse level was modeled as a latent variable based on the observed proportions of the production of core lexicon items in two different sets of core lexicon measures using structural equation modeling.

RESULTS

Results indicated that both criterion for core lexicon measures capture word retrieval ability in discourse. Greater residual variances were found in the core lexicon measure established by the percentage criterion compared to the one established by the frequency criterion. This indicates that the measure based on the percentage criterion is more affected by measurement errors.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide evidence that the frequency criterion is better to use for the development of core lexicon measures for core nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs, but not for function words. However, our findings are limited to core lexicon measures based on language samples elicited by wordless picture books. This may not be easily applied to other core lexicon measures that use different discourse elicitation tasks due to the difference in quality and quantity of language samples. Ideally, the same approach should be replicated to evaluate the appropriateness of respective criteria in the development of core lexicon measures.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20304144.

Validation of an Automated Procedure for Calculating Core Lexicon From Transcripts

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to advance the use of structured, monologic discourse analysis by validating an automated scoring procedure for core lexicon (CoreLex) using transcripts.

METHOD

Forty-nine transcripts from persons with aphasia and 48 transcripts from persons with no brain injury were retrieved from the AphasiaBank database. Five structured monologic discourse tasks were scored manually by trained scorers and via automation using a newly developed CLAN command based upon previously published lists for CoreLex. Point-to-point (or word-by-word) accuracy and reliability of the two methods were calculated. Scoring discrepancies were examined to identify errors. Time estimates for each method were calculated to determine if automated scoring improved efficiency.

RESULTS

Intraclass correlation coefficients for the tasks ranged from .998 to .978, indicating excellent intermethod reliability. Automated scoring using CLAN represented a significant time savings for an experienced CLAN user and for inexperienced CLAN users following step-by-step instructions.

CONCLUSIONS

Automated scoring of CoreLex is a valid and reliable alternative to the current gold standard of manually scoring CoreLex from transcribed monologic discourse samples. The downstream time saving of this automated analysis may allow for more efficient and broader utilization of this discourse measure in aphasia research. To further encourage the use of this method, go to https://aphasia.talkbank.org/discourse/CoreLexicon/ for materials and the step-by-step instructions utilized in this project.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20399304.

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Purpose Spoken discourse analysis is commonly employed in the assessment and treatment of people living with aphasia, yet there is no standardization in assessment, analysis, or reporting procedures, thereby precluding comparison/meta-analyses of data and hindering replication of findings. An important first step is to identify current practices in collecting and analyzing spoken discourse in aphasia. Thus, this study surveyed current practices, with the goal of working toward standardizing spoken discourse assessment first in research settings with subsequent implementation into clinical settings. Method A mixed-methods (quantitative and qualitative) survey was publicized to researchers and clinicians around the globe who have collected and/or analyzed spoken discourse data in aphasia. The survey data were collected between September and November 2019. Results Of the 201 individuals who consented to participate, 189 completed all mandatory questions in the survey (with fewer completing nonmandatory response questions). The majority of respondents reported barriers to utilizing discourse including transcription, coding, and analysis. The most common barrier was time (e.g., lack of time). Respondents also indicated that there was a lack of, and a need for, psychometric properties and normative data for spoken discourse use in the assessment and treatment of persons with aphasia. Quantitative and qualitative results are described in detail. Conclusions The current survey study evaluated spoken discourse methods in aphasia across research and clinical settings. Findings from this study will be used to guide development of process standardization in spoken discourse and for the creation of a psychometric and normative property database. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.166395100.

Development of a measure of function word use in narrative discourse: core lexicon analysis in aphasia

BACKGROUND

Although discourse-level assessments contribute to predicting real-world performance in persons with aphasia (PWA), the use of discourse measures is uncommon in clinical settings due to resource-heavy procedures. Moreover, assessing function word use in discourse requires the arduous procedure of defining grammatical categories for each word in language transcripts.

AIMS

The purpose of this exploratory study was twofold: (1) to develop core function word lists as a clinician-friendly means of evaluating function word use in discourse; and (2) to examine the ability of the core function word measure to differentiate PWA from cognitively healthy adults and persons with fluent aphasia from non-fluent aphasia.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

The 25 most commonly used function words (core function words) were extracted from narrative language samples from 470 cognitively healthy adults, which were divided into seven age groups (20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s). The percent agreement of core function words for 11 PWA (fluent aphasia = 5; non-fluent aphasia = 6) and 11 age- and education-matched controls were then calculated. Percent agreement for the core function words produced was compared between the controls and the PWA group, and between participants with fluent aphasia and non-fluent aphasia.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

The results indicated that PWA produced fewer core function words from the lists than the control group, and that core function word use was strongly correlated with aphasia severity. Persons with non-fluent aphasia produced fewer core function words than those with fluent aphasia, although this could be a confound of aphasia classification from the use of the Western Aphasia Battery (WAB)-Revised.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Core function word lists consisting of a limited number of items for quantifying function word use in discourse remain in a nascent stage of development. However, the findings are consistent with previous studies analysing the total production of function words in language samples produced by PWA. Therefore, core function words may potentially serve as a clinician-friendly manner of quantifying function words produced in discourse. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject Function word analysis in discourse requires arduous processes of identifying the error production and grammatical category of function words in discourse. Previous studies have demonstrated that core lexicon measures are an efficient, simple means of quantifying discourse in PWA. However, function words have never been considered for generating an independent core lexicon list. What this paper adds to existing knowledge As an exploratory study, we focused primarily on developing a clinician-friendly measure to evaluate function word production in discourse, motivated by the idea of an adaptation strategy within the core lexicon framework. Our findings demonstrated that by using a simple scoring system that the core lexicon measure provides, we differentiated the control group from the PWA group, and persons with fluent aphasia from persons with non-fluent aphasia. Additionally, we found significant correlations between function word production and aphasia severity determined by WAB Aphasia Quotient (AQ). What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The results add empirical evidence for the utility of core function word lists for quantifying function word usage in discourse in PWA. Counting the presence and absence of function words in discourse will allow clinicians to avoid labour-intensive preparatory work, and to obtain useful diagnostic information in a less time-consuming way.