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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Brain and language 2005-02, Vol.92 (2), p.106-116 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
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&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 |