Community responses to persons with aphasia participating in CoActive therapeutic theatre: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persons with aphasia (PWA) experience a number of communicative and social-emotional challenges. Reported experiences of PWA include but are not limited to, being misunderstood, isolated, frustrated, and infantilised. AIMS: The aim of this pilot study, involving a Life Participation Approach to Aphasia (LPAA), conducted over the course of 2 years, was to understand community perceptions of aphasia while PWA engaged in an interprofessional treatment program involving speech and drama therapy. METHODS & PROCEDURES: The interprofessional treatment program involved PWA participating in a therapeutic theatre program using the CoActive Therapeutic Theater (CoATT) while also receiving speech-language therapy. Each year, the PWA performed a different, original therapeutic theatre production for a public audience, at the culmination of their interprofessional treatment program. In this paper, we share data obtained from perspectives of audience members who witnessed the theatre production and aphasia education during the first year of the study and friends and family of PWA who participated in the therapeutic theatre process during the second year of the study. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Responses from audience members who participated in aphasia education and witnessed the therapeutic theatre performance by the PWA during the first year, indicated an increased knowledge of aphasia. Friends and family members of PWA who witnessed their loved ones engaging in the CoATT process through interprofessional treatment, in the second year, reported that their loved ones benefited from the CoATT process, which was distinct from other therapeutic processes to their knowledge and that they were impacted by watching their loved one perform. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: These initial findings create footing towards understanding impact of therapeutic theatre in combination with speech-language therapy in the lives of PWA. They help us to obtain an initial appreciation of how therapeutic theatre and aphasia education help connect PWA and their community. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Caregivers and communities at large play a significant role in and substantially impact the recovery of their loved ones (Dalemans et al., 2010; Grawburget et al., 2013; Kniepmann & Cupler, 2014) with aphasia. However, existing research suggests that persons with aphasia (PWA) are often misunderstood, isolated and infantilised by their communities. What this paper adds to existing knowledge The findings of our study reveal that friends, families and extended communities of PWA gain a positive and deep understanding of challenges experienced by PWA through therapeutic theatre supported by speech language therapy, based in a new CoActive Therapeutic Theatre (CoATT) model. This PWA community also agrees that therapeutic theatre in combination with speech-language therapy provides confidence and camaraderie between PWAs and strengthen connection between all constituencies. These results support the need for interprofessional intervention within the framework of a Life Participation Approach to Aphasia (LPAA). What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Treatment paradigms that bring PWAs in contact with their communities using an LPAA approach can increase confidence and social engagement for PWAs potentially leading to better outcomes for their individual speech-language therapy as well as create means of educating communities about PWA, and their stories.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".