Short-Form Philadelphia Naming Test: Rationale and Empirical Evaluation
Short-Form Philadelphia Naming Test: Rationale and Empirical Evaluation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0089
复制
发表时间：
2012-05-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Schwartz, Myrna F.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Walker, Grant M.;Schwartz, Myrna F.
目的：创建费城命名测验(PNT；Roach，Schwartz，Martin，Grewal，&Brecher，1996)的两个匹配的简短表格，其测量结果与PNT相似。方法：在研究1中，使用94名失语症患者的命名档案数据来确定哪些PNT条目应该包括在简短表格中。PNT30-A和PNT30-B这两个构建的30个条目的集合，使用了56名失语症患者的单独组的档案数据进行了验证。结果：在研究1中，PNT30-A和PNT30-B被发现具有内部一致性，并且这些条目上的准确度分数与PNT总分高度相关。在研究2中，PNT的准确性在1周内非常可靠，单独使用PNT30-A和PNT30-B得到的结果与PNT以及彼此之间的结果相似。结论：PNT的简明形式可以可靠地评估PNT的性能，结果可以与所提供的常模进行比较。这两个匹配的测试可以测量一个人的命名能力的变化。
Purpose: To create two matched short forms of the Philadelphia Naming Test (PNT; Roach, Schwartz, Martin, Grewal, & Brecher, 1996) that yield similar results to the PNT for measuring anomia.Method: In Study 1, archived naming data from 94 individuals with aphasia were used to identify which PNT items should be included in the short forms. The 2 constructed sets of 30 items, PNT30-A and PNT30-B, were validated using archived data from a separate group of 56 individuals with aphasia. In Study 2, the reliability of the PNT, PNT30-A, and PNT30-B across independent test administrations was evaluated with a new group of 25 individuals with aphasia who were selected to represent the full range of naming impairment.Results: In Study 1, PNT30-A and PNT30-B were found to be internally consistent, and accuracy scores on these subsets of items were highly correlated with the full PNT. In Study 2, PNT accuracy was extremely reliable over the span of 1 week, and independent administrations of PNT30-A and PNT30-B produced similar results to the PNT and to each other.Conclusion: The short forms of the PNT can be used to reliably estimate PNT performance, and the results can be compared to the provided norms. The 2 matched tests allow for the measurement of change in an individual's naming ability.