MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095022343 · doi:10.1080/17483107.2020.1842917

Functional impact of augmentative and alternative communication scale: development of an outcome measure for educators of students with complex communication needs

2020· article· en· W3095022343 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen E. Ryan, Tracy A. Shepherd, Anne Marie Renzoni, Danielle D’Alessandro, Anna Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmentative and alternative communicationOutcome (game theory)Measure (data warehouse)Scale (ratio)PsychologyComputer scienceMedical educationApplied psychologyMedicineMathematicsGeographyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The study aim was to develop and assess the measurement properties of the Functional Impact of Augmentative and Alternative Communication - Educator (FIAAC-E) scale - an educator-reported measure designed to detect change in factors associated with communicative participation in students who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). METHODS: The study had three phases. In phase 1 (content validity), 22 content specialists independently rated the relevancy of 22 dimensions proposed for the new scale. In phase 2 (item generation, face validity), 8 educators independently completed a preliminary version of the FIAAC-E scale and flagged items that were unclear. Next, these educators adjusted the wording of unclear items during consensus-building sessions. In phase 3 (item reduction, reliability, convergent validity), 62 educators completed an online survey that included the revised FIAAC-E scale. Survey data were used to shorten the scale, estimate its reliability, and evaluate support for its convergent validity. RESULTS: In phase 1, the 11 dimensions ranked most highly by content specialists were selected for inclusion in the preliminary scale. In phase 2, educators reviewed 113 items and revised 33 to improve clarity. In phase 3, correlational statistics informed the selection of 77 items for the shortened scale. Subsequent data analyses indicated acceptable levels of internal consistency and test-retest reliability and support for convergent validity of the preliminary measure. CONCLUSION: The study provides emerging evidence that supports the FIAAC-E scale as a reliable way to evaluate communicative participation in children and youth who use AAC systems at school.Implications for rehabilitationUsing a reliable means to measure the effectiveness of AAC for children and youth at school may reveal important factors that influence successful communicative, academic, and social participation in school.The FIAAC-E scale is a promising educator-reported questionnaire to inform the development of communication goals and monitor progress towards meeting these goals for students with complex communication needs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive TechnologySame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207