TY - JOUR
T1 - The relationship between treatment outcomes and the underlying cognitive deficit
T2 - Evidence from the remediation of acquired dysgraphia
AU - Rapp, Brenda
N1 - Funding Information:
Address correspondence to: Brenda Rapp, Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA. Email: rapp@cogsci.jhu.edu This work was made possible by the support of NIH grants MH55758 and DC006740. In addition, I would like to express my appreciation of Delia Kong's dedication and many contributions to this project.
Copyright:
Copyright 2008 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2005/11
Y1 - 2005/11
N2 - Background: It is unclear to what extent treatment outcomes are significantly influenced by the specific cognitive deficits that underlie an individual's language impairment. That is, it is not well understood if treatment benefits such as item-specific relearning, generalisation to untreated items, and long-term maintenance vary according to deficit type. Aims: The aim of this investigation was to look at the relationship between deficit type and responsiveness to treatment by examining the results of applying the same remediation protocol to individuals suffering from deficits affecting different components of the spelling process. Methods & procedures: Three adults with acquired dysgraphia were identified as suffering from deficits to either the orthographic lexicon or the graphemic buffer. They were administered the same spell-study-pell treatment protocol during bi-weekly sessions for periods of 7-11 weeks with periodic follow-up evaluations that continued for 40-112 weeks after the end of treatment. Outcomes & results: All three individuals exhibited significant item-specific treatment benefits that were apparent even 40-112 weeks after the end of treatment. Furthermore, the individuals with the graphemic buffer deficits showed generalisation to untreated words, while the individual with the orthographic lexicon deficit showed an item-specific benefit merely from the repeated testing of words. Conclusions: The presence or absence of generalisation effects appears to be related to the nature of the underlying deficit, while the long-term stability of treatment benefits does not.
AB - Background: It is unclear to what extent treatment outcomes are significantly influenced by the specific cognitive deficits that underlie an individual's language impairment. That is, it is not well understood if treatment benefits such as item-specific relearning, generalisation to untreated items, and long-term maintenance vary according to deficit type. Aims: The aim of this investigation was to look at the relationship between deficit type and responsiveness to treatment by examining the results of applying the same remediation protocol to individuals suffering from deficits affecting different components of the spelling process. Methods & procedures: Three adults with acquired dysgraphia were identified as suffering from deficits to either the orthographic lexicon or the graphemic buffer. They were administered the same spell-study-pell treatment protocol during bi-weekly sessions for periods of 7-11 weeks with periodic follow-up evaluations that continued for 40-112 weeks after the end of treatment. Outcomes & results: All three individuals exhibited significant item-specific treatment benefits that were apparent even 40-112 weeks after the end of treatment. Furthermore, the individuals with the graphemic buffer deficits showed generalisation to untreated words, while the individual with the orthographic lexicon deficit showed an item-specific benefit merely from the repeated testing of words. Conclusions: The presence or absence of generalisation effects appears to be related to the nature of the underlying deficit, while the long-term stability of treatment benefits does not.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=30644458753&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=30644458753&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/02687030544000209
DO - 10.1080/02687030544000209
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:30644458753
SN - 0268-7038
VL - 19
SP - 994
EP - 1008
JO - Aphasiology
JF - Aphasiology
IS - 10-11
ER -