From theory to therapy in aphasia: Where are we now and where to next?
From theory to therapy in aphasia: Where are we now and where to next?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/096020100389147
复制
发表时间：
2000-06-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Nickels, L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Best, W;Nickels, L
近年来，获得性失语症的语言治疗受到了广泛的关注，争论的焦点集中在它是否有效以及如何衡量最佳疗效。在本文中，我们认为，虽然许多不同的治疗方法的疗效已被清楚地记录，仍然有未回答的问题。具体地，仍然难以预测哪种治疗任务或方法将成功地补救哪种特定病症。我们认为，这在贫血的康复中尤其重要，而在其他领域（例如，阅读）赤字、任务和结果之间的关系更容易解释。我们详细讨论了这些差异的原因，认为理论模型的特异性，治疗任务的复杂性，以及缺乏（报告）语言缺陷的全面评估都有助于这个问题。我们的结论是，研究需要执行任务和赤字之间的相互作用的微观分析。
Language therapy for acquired aphasia has come under much scrutiny in recent years, with debate focusing on whether or not it is effective and how best efficacy can be measured. In this paper, we argue that although the efficacy of many different therapies has been clearly documented, there remain unanswered questions. In particular, it is still difficult to predict which therapeutic task or approach will be successful at remediating which particular disorders. We argue that this is particularly hue in the rehabilitation of anemia, whilst in other areas (e.g., reading) the relationship between deficit, task, and outcome is easier to interpret. We discuss in detail the reasons for these differences arguing that specificity of theoretical models, complexity of therapeutic tasks, and a lack of(reporting of) comprehensive assessment of linguistic deficits all contribute to the problem. We conclude that research needs to perform a microanalysis of the interactions between tasks and deficits.