Measuring outcomes in aphasia research: A review of current practice and an agenda for standardisation

Background: Aphasia treatment research lacks a uniform approach to outcome measurement. A wide range of outcome instruments are used across trials and there is a lack of research evidence exploring the outcomes most important to stakeholders. This lack of standardisation produces research outcomes that are difficult to compare and combine, limiting the potential to strengthen treatment evidence through meta-analysis and data pooling. The current heterogeneity in aphasia treatment research outcome measurement may be addressed through the development of a core outcome set (COS)?an agreed standardised set of outcomes for use in treatment trials.Aims: This article aims to provide a rationale and agenda for the development of a COS for aphasia treatment research.Main Contribution: A review of the literature reveals heterogeneity in the way outcome measurement is performed in aphasia treatment research. COSs have been developed in a wide range of health fields to introduce standardisation to research outcome measurement. Potential benefits of COSs include easier comparison and combination of research outcomes, improved quality of systematic reviews and greater transparency in research reporting. The use of broad stakeholder consultation also supports the development of research outcomes that are meaningful. It is proposed that a COS for aphasia treatment research could be developed in three stages. First, consensus-based techniques would be used to reach international agreement on the outcomes that are most important to stakeholders. Second, a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcome instruments would provide synthesised evidence to support the choice of tools to most effectively capture the effects of aphasia treatments. Third, final agreement on a COS would be sought through an international consensus conference.Conclusions: There is an identified need for standardisation in the way outcomes are selected and measured in aphasia treatment research. COS development may provide an effective, consensus-based solution to this need.

Contributors

Wallace, Sarah J. Worrall, Linda Rose, Tanya Le Dorze, Guylaine

Publication

Journal: Aphasiology
Volume:
Issue:
Pages: 1 - 21
Year: 2014
DOI: 10.1080/02687038.2014.930262

Further Study Information

Current Stage: Not Applicable
Date:
Funding source(s): This work was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award (APA) scholarship, awarded to Sarah.

---

Method(s)

- Literature review

Linked Studies

• A core outcome set for aphasia treatment research: The ROMA consensus statement
• Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health to identify outcome domains for a core outcome set for aphasia: a comparison of stakeholder perspectives
• A good outcome for aphasia
• Which treatment outcomes are most important to aphasia clinicians and managers? An international e-Delphi consensus study
• Which outcomes are most important to people with aphasia and their families? an international nominal group technique study framed within the ICF
• Core Outcomes in Aphasia Treatment Research: An e-Delphi Consensus Study of International Aphasia Researchers.
• Core Outcome Set Use in Poststroke Aphasia Treatment Research: Examining Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation Using the Theoretical Domains Framework
• Measuring communication as a core outcome in aphasia trials: Results of the ROMA-2 international core outcome set development meeting
• ‘A Meaningful Difference, but Not Ultimately the Difference I Would Want’: A Mixed-Methods Approach to Explore and Benchmark Clinically Meaningful Changes in Aphasia Recovery

Related Links

No related links