A Communication Partner Training Program Delivered via Telehealth for People Living With Parkinson's (Better Conversations With Parkinson's): Protocol for a Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parkinson's can impact people's speech, cognition, pragmatics, and language, significantly affecting their conversations with others. The speech and language therapy approach called communication partner training (CPT) is effective for a range of communication difficulties. However, speech and language therapy interventions for people with Parkinson's predominantly focus on impairments, with little provision of CPT for this population. Better Conversations is a CPT approach that involves working with a dyad (the person with the communication difficulty and a conversation partner [CP]) to build conversation skills. It is effective at reducing barriers to conversation, and for some, it significantly increases targeted facilitatory strategies. Some approaches to CPT have been adapted to be delivered via telehealth. This can maximize ecological validity and convenience. Furthermore, telehealth is widely accepted as a delivery method for other interventions for Parkinson's. This study presents the protocol for a pilot feasibility study of a Better Conversations CPT delivered via telehealth to people living with Parkinson's and their CPs, called Better Conversations with Parkinson's (BCP). OBJECTIVE: The primary aim is to evaluate the feasibility of the BCP program delivered via telehealth with a treatment group from a collaborating National Health Service (NHS) site to establish for a main trial whether BCP can be delivered as intended in an NHS setting. The aim is to establish: (1) the acceptability of the program for people living with Parkinson's, family members, and speech and language therapists (SLTs); (2) the feasibility of delivering the BCP program; (3) the recruitment and retention rates; (4) a sample size calculation; and (5) the most appropriate primary outcome measure. METHODS: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from London-Central Research Ethics Committee (reference: 22/LO/0332). This case-series feasibility pilot study will recruit 10-12 dyads to ensure 10 complete data sets. Participants will be recruited by a collaborating NHS site located in England. Participants will be involved for 16 weeks (weeks 1-2 preintervention measures, weeks 3-8 intervention, weeks 10-12 postintervention measures, week 16 follow-up interview). Quantitative and qualitative methods will be used to analyze the study data. Speech, communication, and quality of life assessment data will be analyzed statistically to determine a suitably sensitive outcome measure. Descriptive statistics will be used to report on recruitment, attendance, and attrition. Finally, acceptability and feasibility will be evaluated using participant feedback, interviews, and the reflective diary and feedback of the SLT administering the therapy (by the research assistant who is the first author). This data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: This study was approved for funding from Parkinson's UK. Study recruitment commenced in July 2022. The results of the data analysis are expected to be available by September 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Insights from this study will provide valuable information about the acceptability and feasibility of a remotely delivered Better Conversations CPT approach for people living with Parkinson's and their CPs. An outcome of this study will be a manualized BCP program coproduced by people living with Parkinson's, their families, and a group of expert SLTs. The study results will guide the next stages of intervention development. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/41416.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".