MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3024952819 · doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12537

Impact of aphasia on communication in couples

2020· article· en· W3024952819 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Language & Communication Disorders · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Établissements canadiensUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Organismes subventionnairesSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Mots-clésAphasiaPsychologyConversationFeelingActive listeningThematic analysisPerspective (graphical)Developmental psychologyStroke (engine)Qualitative researchSocial psychologyCognitive psychologyCommunication

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Communication is at the heart of relationships, especially for couples. When language is altered, as it is in aphasia, communication in couples can be affected. AIMS: To explore how members of a couple perceive the impact of aphasia on their communication. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Nine French-speaking couples participated in the study. One member of each couple had chronic stroke-related aphasia, which varied in type and severity. The 18 participants took part in individual semi-structured interviews to understand their perspective on communication within their couple. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed with a qualitative thematic analysis. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: (1) experiencing limitations in conversation; (2) assuming changed speaking and listening roles; and (3) experiencing new emotions, feelings and reactions in communication. Couples experienced diminished frequency and duration of conversations as well as restrained topics after the onset of aphasia. Ten participants reported that each member's communication role of listener versus speaker had changed, and that the person with aphasia became a less active participant. Communication was described as 'positive' before aphasia and 'fine' to 'difficult' following aphasia. Persons with aphasia and spouses expressed experiencing difficulties managing emotions related to communication. Frustration and caution towards the other member of the couple had been associated with aphasia. In addition, five spouses reported that they refrained from initiating discussions on specific topics in order to maintain a positive relationship with the person with aphasia. CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS: The results describe some of the consequences of aphasia on communication in couples. Clinicians could use interviews to understand the impact of aphasia on a couple's communication. This may help to design communication partner training (CPT) that better aligns with the particular needs of couples living with aphasia, acknowledging the importance of emotional dimensions of relationships. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject The general psychosocial impacts of aphasia on persons with aphasia and spouses are known. Their conversations have been described and used as a focus for CPT. However, CPT may be difficult to implement in clinical settings. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge This paper provides in-depth descriptions of perceived changes in relational or transactional communication by the PWA and their spouse. The frequency, duration and topics of conversations changed and emotions such as frustration and caution appeared. Participants assumed changed speaking and listening roles. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The participants' description of communication could be used by speech-language pathologists when conducting CPT to illustrate how aphasia affects communication in couples. Emotions emerging as a result of changes in communication following aphasia should be assessed before CPT and could be a starting point to work on communication. This could support clients' commitment in CPT.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,279
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,382

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,032
Tête enseignante GPT0,362
Écart entre enseignants0,331 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle