Analyzing aphasia data in a multidimensional symptom space

The utility of single-case vs. group studies has been debated in neuropsychology for many years. The purpose of the present study is to illustrate an alternative approach to group studies of aphasia, in which the same symptom dimensions that are commonly used to assign patients to classical taxonomi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Brain and language 2005-02, Vol.92 (2), p.106-116
Hauptverfasser: Bates, Elizabeth, Saygın, Ayşe Pınar, Moineau, Suzanne, Marangolo, Paola, Pizzamiglio, Luigi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 116
container_issue 2
container_start_page 106
container_title Brain and language
container_volume 92
creator Bates, Elizabeth
Saygın, Ayşe Pınar
Moineau, Suzanne
Marangolo, Paola
Pizzamiglio, Luigi
description The utility of single-case vs. group studies has been debated in neuropsychology for many years. The purpose of the present study is to illustrate an alternative approach to group studies of aphasia, in which the same symptom dimensions that are commonly used to assign patients to classical taxonomies (fluency, naming, repetition, and comprehension) are used as independent and continuous predictors in a multivariate design, without assigning patients to syndromes. One hundred twenty-six Italian-speaking patients with aphasia were first classified into seven classic aphasia categories, based on fluency, naming, auditory comprehension, and repetition scales. There were two goals: (1) compare group analyses based on aphasia types with multivariate analyses that sidestep classification and treat aphasic symptoms as continuous variables; (2) present correlation-based outlier analyses that can be used to identify individuals who occupy unusual positions in the multivariate “symptom space.” In the service of the first goal, group performance on an external validation measure (the Token Test) was assessed in three steps: analyses of variance based on aphasia type, regressions using the same cut-offs for fluency, naming, comprehension and repetition as independent but dichotomous predictors, and regressions using the same subscales as continuous predictors (with no cut-offs). More variance in Token Test performance was accounted for when symptoms were treated as continuous predictors than with the other two methods, though use of independent but dichotomous predictors accounted for more variance than aphasia taxonomies. Thus, if we by-pass classical taxonomies and treat patients as points in a multidimensional symptom space, better predictions are obtained. Outlier analyses show that group results depend on heterogeneity among patients, which can be used as a search tool to identify potentially interesting dissociations. Hence this multivariate group approach is complementary to and compatible with single-case methods.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.06.108
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85638348</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ735545</ericid><els_id>S0093934X04002147</els_id><sourcerecordid>67337803</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a462t-3acc071295a2889a196b75ca5cef0669e0ecb5ba172b5f5b54011cc498aafd53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1P3DAQhq2qVVmgv6BVlQvcsh1_xq7UA0LQDyFx4cDNmjgOeJUv7Gyl5deTsBHc4DTSzON3xg8hXymsKVD1Y7MusauaNQMQa1BTU38gKwoGckal_EhWAIbnhovbA3KY0gaAUqHpZ3JApWJGaLUiP886bHaPobvLcLjHFDCrcMQsdBlm7bYZQxVa36XQT1yWdu0w9m2WBnT-mHyqsUn-y1KPyM3lxc35n_zq-vff87OrHIViY87ROSgoMxKZ1gapUWUhHUrna1DKePCulCXSgpWylqUU05nOCaMR60ryI3K6jx1i_7D1abRtSM43DXa-3yarpeKaC_0uqArOCw18AvkedLFPKfraDjG0GHeWgp3V2o19VmtntRbU1Jzjvy_x27L11eubxeUEnCwAJodNHbFzIb1yShYFY_P6b3vOx-Bexhf_Ci6lmP_7axlPTv8HH21ywXfOVyF6N9qqD2_e-QR4o6DV</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67337803</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Analyzing aphasia data in a multidimensional symptom space</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Bates, Elizabeth ; Saygın, Ayşe Pınar ; Moineau, Suzanne ; Marangolo, Paola ; Pizzamiglio, Luigi</creator><creatorcontrib>Bates, Elizabeth ; Saygın, Ayşe Pınar ; Moineau, Suzanne ; Marangolo, Paola ; Pizzamiglio, Luigi</creatorcontrib><description>The utility of single-case vs. group studies has been debated in neuropsychology for many years. The purpose of the present study is to illustrate an alternative approach to group studies of aphasia, in which the same symptom dimensions that are commonly used to assign patients to classical taxonomies (fluency, naming, repetition, and comprehension) are used as independent and continuous predictors in a multivariate design, without assigning patients to syndromes. One hundred twenty-six Italian-speaking patients with aphasia were first classified into seven classic aphasia categories, based on fluency, naming, auditory comprehension, and repetition scales. There were two goals: (1) compare group analyses based on aphasia types with multivariate analyses that sidestep classification and treat aphasic symptoms as continuous variables; (2) present correlation-based outlier analyses that can be used to identify individuals who occupy unusual positions in the multivariate “symptom space.” In the service of the first goal, group performance on an external validation measure (the Token Test) was assessed in three steps: analyses of variance based on aphasia type, regressions using the same cut-offs for fluency, naming, comprehension and repetition as independent but dichotomous predictors, and regressions using the same subscales as continuous predictors (with no cut-offs). More variance in Token Test performance was accounted for when symptoms were treated as continuous predictors than with the other two methods, though use of independent but dichotomous predictors accounted for more variance than aphasia taxonomies. Thus, if we by-pass classical taxonomies and treat patients as points in a multidimensional symptom space, better predictions are obtained. Outlier analyses show that group results depend on heterogeneity among patients, which can be used as a search tool to identify potentially interesting dissociations. Hence this multivariate group approach is complementary to and compatible with single-case methods.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0093-934X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1090-2155</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.06.108</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15629486</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BRLGAZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Diego, CA: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult and adolescent clinical studies ; Aphasia ; Aphasia - diagnosis ; Aphasia - physiopathology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Classification ; Groups ; Humans ; Medical sciences ; Multivariate Analysis ; Neuropsychological Tests ; Organic mental disorders. Neuropsychology ; Patients ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Predictor Variables ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychopathology. Psychiatry ; Regression Analysis ; Symptoms (Individual Disorders) ; Token Test (Language)</subject><ispartof>Brain and language, 2005-02, Vol.92 (2), p.106-116</ispartof><rights>2004 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a462t-3acc071295a2889a196b75ca5cef0669e0ecb5ba172b5f5b54011cc498aafd53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a462t-3acc071295a2889a196b75ca5cef0669e0ecb5ba172b5f5b54011cc498aafd53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.06.108$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27926,27927,45997</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ735545$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=16577223$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15629486$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bates, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saygın, Ayşe Pınar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moineau, Suzanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marangolo, Paola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pizzamiglio, Luigi</creatorcontrib><title>Analyzing aphasia data in a multidimensional symptom space</title><title>Brain and language</title><addtitle>Brain Lang</addtitle><description>The utility of single-case vs. group studies has been debated in neuropsychology for many years. The purpose of the present study is to illustrate an alternative approach to group studies of aphasia, in which the same symptom dimensions that are commonly used to assign patients to classical taxonomies (fluency, naming, repetition, and comprehension) are used as independent and continuous predictors in a multivariate design, without assigning patients to syndromes. One hundred twenty-six Italian-speaking patients with aphasia were first classified into seven classic aphasia categories, based on fluency, naming, auditory comprehension, and repetition scales. There were two goals: (1) compare group analyses based on aphasia types with multivariate analyses that sidestep classification and treat aphasic symptoms as continuous variables; (2) present correlation-based outlier analyses that can be used to identify individuals who occupy unusual positions in the multivariate “symptom space.” In the service of the first goal, group performance on an external validation measure (the Token Test) was assessed in three steps: analyses of variance based on aphasia type, regressions using the same cut-offs for fluency, naming, comprehension and repetition as independent but dichotomous predictors, and regressions using the same subscales as continuous predictors (with no cut-offs). More variance in Token Test performance was accounted for when symptoms were treated as continuous predictors than with the other two methods, though use of independent but dichotomous predictors accounted for more variance than aphasia taxonomies. Thus, if we by-pass classical taxonomies and treat patients as points in a multidimensional symptom space, better predictions are obtained. Outlier analyses show that group results depend on heterogeneity among patients, which can be used as a search tool to identify potentially interesting dissociations. Hence this multivariate group approach is complementary to and compatible with single-case methods.</description><subject>Adult and adolescent clinical studies</subject><subject>Aphasia</subject><subject>Aphasia - diagnosis</subject><subject>Aphasia - physiopathology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Groups</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Multivariate Analysis</subject><subject>Neuropsychological Tests</subject><subject>Organic mental disorders. Neuropsychology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Predictor Variables</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychopathology. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Symptoms (Individual Disorders)</subject><subject>Token Test (Language)</subject><issn>0093-934X</issn><issn>1090-2155</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1P3DAQhq2qVVmgv6BVlQvcsh1_xq7UA0LQDyFx4cDNmjgOeJUv7Gyl5deTsBHc4DTSzON3xg8hXymsKVD1Y7MusauaNQMQa1BTU38gKwoGckal_EhWAIbnhovbA3KY0gaAUqHpZ3JApWJGaLUiP886bHaPobvLcLjHFDCrcMQsdBlm7bYZQxVa36XQT1yWdu0w9m2WBnT-mHyqsUn-y1KPyM3lxc35n_zq-vff87OrHIViY87ROSgoMxKZ1gapUWUhHUrna1DKePCulCXSgpWylqUU05nOCaMR60ryI3K6jx1i_7D1abRtSM43DXa-3yarpeKaC_0uqArOCw18AvkedLFPKfraDjG0GHeWgp3V2o19VmtntRbU1Jzjvy_x27L11eubxeUEnCwAJodNHbFzIb1yShYFY_P6b3vOx-Bexhf_Ci6lmP_7axlPTv8HH21ywXfOVyF6N9qqD2_e-QR4o6DV</recordid><startdate>20050201</startdate><enddate>20050201</enddate><creator>Bates, Elizabeth</creator><creator>Saygın, Ayşe Pınar</creator><creator>Moineau, Suzanne</creator><creator>Marangolo, Paola</creator><creator>Pizzamiglio, Luigi</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050201</creationdate><title>Analyzing aphasia data in a multidimensional symptom space</title><author>Bates, Elizabeth ; Saygın, Ayşe Pınar ; Moineau, Suzanne ; Marangolo, Paola ; Pizzamiglio, Luigi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a462t-3acc071295a2889a196b75ca5cef0669e0ecb5ba172b5f5b54011cc498aafd53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Adult and adolescent clinical studies</topic><topic>Aphasia</topic><topic>Aphasia - diagnosis</topic><topic>Aphasia - physiopathology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Groups</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Multivariate Analysis</topic><topic>Neuropsychological Tests</topic><topic>Organic mental disorders. Neuropsychology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Predictor Variables</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychopathology. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Symptoms (Individual Disorders)</topic><topic>Token Test (Language)</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bates, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saygın, Ayşe Pınar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moineau, Suzanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marangolo, Paola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pizzamiglio, Luigi</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Brain and language</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bates, Elizabeth</au><au>Saygın, Ayşe Pınar</au><au>Moineau, Suzanne</au><au>Marangolo, Paola</au><au>Pizzamiglio, Luigi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ735545</ericid><atitle>Analyzing aphasia data in a multidimensional symptom space</atitle><jtitle>Brain and language</jtitle><addtitle>Brain Lang</addtitle><date>2005-02-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>106</spage><epage>116</epage><pages>106-116</pages><issn>0093-934X</issn><eissn>1090-2155</eissn><coden>BRLGAZ</coden><abstract>The utility of single-case vs. group studies has been debated in neuropsychology for many years. The purpose of the present study is to illustrate an alternative approach to group studies of aphasia, in which the same symptom dimensions that are commonly used to assign patients to classical taxonomies (fluency, naming, repetition, and comprehension) are used as independent and continuous predictors in a multivariate design, without assigning patients to syndromes. One hundred twenty-six Italian-speaking patients with aphasia were first classified into seven classic aphasia categories, based on fluency, naming, auditory comprehension, and repetition scales. There were two goals: (1) compare group analyses based on aphasia types with multivariate analyses that sidestep classification and treat aphasic symptoms as continuous variables; (2) present correlation-based outlier analyses that can be used to identify individuals who occupy unusual positions in the multivariate “symptom space.” In the service of the first goal, group performance on an external validation measure (the Token Test) was assessed in three steps: analyses of variance based on aphasia type, regressions using the same cut-offs for fluency, naming, comprehension and repetition as independent but dichotomous predictors, and regressions using the same subscales as continuous predictors (with no cut-offs). More variance in Token Test performance was accounted for when symptoms were treated as continuous predictors than with the other two methods, though use of independent but dichotomous predictors accounted for more variance than aphasia taxonomies. Thus, if we by-pass classical taxonomies and treat patients as points in a multidimensional symptom space, better predictions are obtained. Outlier analyses show that group results depend on heterogeneity among patients, which can be used as a search tool to identify potentially interesting dissociations. Hence this multivariate group approach is complementary to and compatible with single-case methods.</abstract><cop>San Diego, CA</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>15629486</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bandl.2004.06.108</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0093-934X
ispartof Brain and language, 2005-02, Vol.92 (2), p.106-116
issn 0093-934X
1090-2155
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85638348
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Adult and adolescent clinical studies
Aphasia
Aphasia - diagnosis
Aphasia - physiopathology
Biological and medical sciences
Classification
Groups
Humans
Medical sciences
Multivariate Analysis
Neuropsychological Tests
Organic mental disorders. Neuropsychology
Patients
Predictive Value of Tests
Predictor Variables
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Regression Analysis
Symptoms (Individual Disorders)
Token Test (Language)
title Analyzing aphasia data in a multidimensional symptom space
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T08%3A58%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Analyzing%20aphasia%20data%20in%20a%20multidimensional%20symptom%20space&rft.jtitle=Brain%20and%20language&rft.au=Bates,%20Elizabeth&rft.date=2005-02-01&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=106&rft.epage=116&rft.pages=106-116&rft.issn=0093-934X&rft.eissn=1090-2155&rft.coden=BRLGAZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.06.108&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67337803%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67337803&rft_id=info:pmid/15629486&rft_ericid=EJ735545&rft_els_id=S0093934X04002147&rfr_iscdi=true