Online Administration of Persian Diagnostic Aphasia Battery in Iranian People with Aphasia
Saved in:
| Title: | Online Administration of Persian Diagnostic Aphasia Battery in Iranian People with Aphasia |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Sayed Mohammad Mahdi Vaghei, Mozhgan Asadi, Banafshe Mansuri |
| Source: | International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. 2025 60(5). |
| Availability: | Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 18 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Computer Assisted Testing, Aphasia, Indo European Languages, Adults, Program Effectiveness, Feasibility Studies, Foreign Countries, Diagnostic Tests |
| Geographic Terms: | Iran |
| DOI: | 10.1111/1460-6984.70097 |
| ISSN: | 1368-2822 1460-6984 |
| Abstract: | Background: Remote assessment through telehealth offers potential benefits for people with aphasia (PWA), particularly where in-person services are limited. However, its diagnostic validity in developing countries remains underexplored due to differences in infrastructure and digital literacy. Aims: To compare in-person and remote administration of the Persian Diagnostic Aphasia Battery-2: Aphasia Quotient 2 (P-DAB2-AQ2) in Persian-speaking PWA and to examine participants' technology use and satisfaction with remote assessment. Methods: Twenty adults with mild to severe aphasia (mean age 55.85 years) completed the P-DAB2-AQ2 both in person and remotely via Skype. The test order was counterbalanced, and administration was conducted by two independent, blinded assessors. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to analyse score consistency across formats. Participants also completed surveys on prior technology use and satisfaction with remote assessment. Results: ICCs indicated excellent agreement between in-person and remote AQ2 scores (0.986) and good to excellent agreement for subtests (0.834-0.981). No significant differences were found for individual subtests (p > 0.05), although the total AQ2 score was marginally higher for in-person assessments (p = 0.044). Connected speech showed the highest variability across formats, leading to aphasia type reclassification in four participants. Ten participants showed AQ2 differences > 5 points, primarily among those with severe aphasia. Despite 60% reporting low comfort with technology, 75% were satisfied with remote assessment, and no significant correlation was found between tech experience or satisfaction and performance. Conclusions: Remote administration of the P-DAB2-AQ2 was reliable and comparable to in-person testing, supporting its clinical feasibility in Iran. However, variability in connected speech scores highlights the need for cautious interpretation. Further studies with larger samples are needed to optimize remote protocols and ensure broader applicability. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1484100 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Background: Remote assessment through telehealth offers potential benefits for people with aphasia (PWA), particularly where in-person services are limited. However, its diagnostic validity in developing countries remains underexplored due to differences in infrastructure and digital literacy. Aims: To compare in-person and remote administration of the Persian Diagnostic Aphasia Battery-2: Aphasia Quotient 2 (P-DAB2-AQ2) in Persian-speaking PWA and to examine participants' technology use and satisfaction with remote assessment. Methods: Twenty adults with mild to severe aphasia (mean age 55.85 years) completed the P-DAB2-AQ2 both in person and remotely via Skype. The test order was counterbalanced, and administration was conducted by two independent, blinded assessors. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to analyse score consistency across formats. Participants also completed surveys on prior technology use and satisfaction with remote assessment. Results: ICCs indicated excellent agreement between in-person and remote AQ2 scores (0.986) and good to excellent agreement for subtests (0.834-0.981). No significant differences were found for individual subtests (p > 0.05), although the total AQ2 score was marginally higher for in-person assessments (p = 0.044). Connected speech showed the highest variability across formats, leading to aphasia type reclassification in four participants. Ten participants showed AQ2 differences > 5 points, primarily among those with severe aphasia. Despite 60% reporting low comfort with technology, 75% were satisfied with remote assessment, and no significant correlation was found between tech experience or satisfaction and performance. Conclusions: Remote administration of the P-DAB2-AQ2 was reliable and comparable to in-person testing, supporting its clinical feasibility in Iran. However, variability in connected speech scores highlights the need for cautious interpretation. Further studies with larger samples are needed to optimize remote protocols and ensure broader applicability. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1368-2822 1460-6984 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/1460-6984.70097 |
