CoDAS
http://www.codas.periodikos.com.br/article/doipath/10.1590/2317-1782/20192018306
CoDAS
Artigo Original

Montreal Communication Evaluation Brief Battery – MEC B: reliability and validity

Fabíola Schwengber Casarin; Karina Carlesso Pagliarin; Raira Fernanda Altmann; Maria Alice de Mattos Pimenta Parente; Perrine Ferré; Hélène Côté; Bernardette Ska; Yves Joanette; Rochele Paz Fonseca.

Downloads: 0
Views: 62

Abstract

Purpose: Search for reliability and validity evidence for the Montreal Communication Evaluation Brief Battery (MEC B) for adults with right brain damage. Methods: Three hundred twenty-four healthy adults and 26 adults with right brain damage, aged 19-75 years, with two or more years of education were evaluated with MEC B. The MEC B Battery contains nine tasks that aim to evaluate communicative abilities as discourse, prosody, lexical-semantic and pragmatic process. Two sources of reliability evidence were used: internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) and interrater reliability. Construct validity was evaluated comparing the Montreal Communication Evaluation Battery (MEC), expanded version and MEC B tasks. Results: Internal consistence was satisfactory and the interrater reliability was considered excellent, as were correlations between MEC Battery and MEC B Battery tasks. Conclusion: The MEC B Battery showed satisfactory reliability and validity evidences. It can be used as outcome measure of intervention programs and assist speech therapists to plan rehabilitation programs.

Keywords

Assessment; Stroke; Test Construction; Language Disorders; Adult

Referências

1 Tzourio-Mazoyer N. Intra- and inter-hemispheric connectivity supporting hemispheric specialization. In: Kennedy H, Van Essen DC, Christen Y, editors. Micro-, meso- and macro-connectomics of the brain. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 129-46. [ Links ]

2 Silagi ML, Radanovic M, Conforto AB, Mendonça LIZ, Mansur LL. Inference comprehension in text reading: performance of individuals with right- versus left-hemisphere lesions and the influence of cognitive functions. PLoS One. 2018;13(5):e0197195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197195. PMid:29795602. [ Links ]

3 Critchley M. Speech and speech-loss in relation to duality of the brain. In: Mountcastle VB, editor. Interhemispheric relations and cerebral dominance. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press; 1962. p. 208-13. [ Links ]

4 Joanette Y, Ansaldo AI. Clinical note: acquired pragmatic impairments and aphasia. Brain Lang. 1999;68(3):529-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2126. PMid:10441192. [ Links ]

5 Leiva S, Difalcis M, López C, Margulis L, Micciulli A, Abusamra V, et al. Disociaciones entre prosodia emocional y lingüística en pacientes con lesiones cerebrales del hemisferio derecho. Lib Rev Peru Psicol. 2017;23(2):213-34. [ Links ]

6 Ferré P, Clermont MF, Lajoie C, Côté H, Abusamra V, Ska B. Clinical profiles of communication impairments after a right-hemisphere stroke: crosscultural clusters. Neuropsicol Latinoam. 2009;1:32-40. [ Links ]

7 Karaduman A, Göksun T, Chatterjee A. Narratives of focal brain injured individuals: a macro-level analysis. Neuropsychologia. 2017;99:314-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.03.027. PMid:28347806. [ Links ]

8 Ferré P, Joanette Y. Communication abilities following right hemisphere damage: prevalence, evaluation, and profiles. Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups. 2016;1(2):106-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/persp1.SIG2.106. [ Links ]

9 Jerônimo GM. Compreensão leitora pós-lesão cerebral de hemisfério direito : um estudo de caso. Let Hoje. 2013;48(3):414-23. [ Links ]

10 Parente MAMP, Fonseca RP, Pagliarin KC, Barreto SS, Soares-Ishigaki ECS, Hübner LC, et al. Bateria Montreal-Toulouse de avaliação da linguagem. São Paulo: Vetor Edit; 2016. Coleção MTL - Brasil. [ Links ]

11 Tompkins CA. Rehabilitation for cognitive-communication disorders in right hemisphere brain damage. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(1, Suppl.):S61-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.10.015. PMid:22202193. [ Links ]

12 Fonseca RP, Parente MAMP, Côté H, Ska B, Joanette Y. Bateria Montreal de Avaliação da Comunicação Bateria MAC. São Paulo: Pró-Fono; 2008. [ Links ]

13 Casarin FS, Ferré LC, Ska B, Joanette Y, Fonseca RP. Adaptação do Protocole MEC de Poche e da Bateria MAC Expandida: bateria MAC Breve. Psico PUCRS. 2013;44:288-99. [ Links ]

14 Casarin FS, Scherer LC, Parente MA MP, Ferré P, Côté H, Ska B, et al. Bateria Montreal de Avaliação da Comunicação, versão abreviada: Bateria MAC Breve. São Paulo: Pró-Fono; 2014. [ Links ]

15 Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB, Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Propriedades psicométricas na avaliação de instrumentos: avaliação da confiabilidade e da validade. Epidemiol Serv Saude. 2017;26(3):649-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022. PMid:28977189. [ Links ]

16 Angeleri R, Bosco FM, Gabbatore I, Bara BG, Sacco K. Assessment battery for communication (ABaCo): normative data. Behav Res Methods. 2012;44(3):845-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0174-9. PMid:22180102. [ Links ]

17 Chaves ML, Izquierdo Y. Differential diagnosis between dementia and depression: a study of efficiency increment. Acta Neurol Scand. 1992;85(6):378-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.1992.tb06032.x. PMid:1642108. [ Links ]

18 Cunha JA. Escalas Beck. São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo; 2001. 171 p. [ Links ]

19 Fonseca RP, Zimmermann N, Oliveira CR, Gindri G, Pawlowski J, Scherer LC. Métodos em avaliação neuropsicológica: pressupostos gerais, neurocognitivos, neuropsicolingüísticos e psicométricos no uso e desenvolvimento de instrumentos. In: Fukushima SS, editor. Métodos em psicobiologia, neurociências e comportamento. São Paulo: ANPEPP; 2012. p. 300-30. [ Links ]

20 Heale R, Twycross A. Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evid Based Nurs. 2015;18(3):66-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129. PMid:25979629. [ Links ]

21 Cicchetti DV, Sparrow SA. Developing criteria for establishing inter-rater reliability of specific items in a given inventory. Am J Ment Defic. 1981;86(2):127-37. PMid:7315877. [ Links ]

22 Pasquali L. Validade dos testes. Rev Exam. 2017;1(1):14-48. [ Links ]

23 Spreen O, Risser AH. Assessment of aphasia. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003. [ Links ]

24 Lezak MD. Neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. [ Links ]

25 Diniz LFM, Mattos P, Abreu N, Fluentes D. O exame neuropsicológico: o que é e para que serve. In: Diniz LFM, Mattos P, Abreu N, Fluentes D, editors. Neuropsicologia: aplicações clínicas. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2016. p. 21-34. [ Links ]

26 DeVellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1991. [ Links ]

27 Nunnaly J. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hil; 1978. [ Links ]

28 Guilford JP. Creativity. Am Psychol. 1950;5(9):444-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0063487. PMid:14771441. [ Links ]

29 Pawlowski J, Trentini CM, Bandeira DR. Discutindo procedimentos psicométricos a partir da análise de um instrumento de avaliação neuropsicológica breve. Psico-USF. 2007;12(2):211-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-82712007000200009. [ Links ]

30 Pagliarin KC, Ortiz KZ, Parente MA, Arteche A, Joanette Y, Nespoulous JL, et al. Montreal-Toulouse Language Assessment Battery for aphasia: validity and reliability evidence. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34(3):463-71. PMid:24473247. [ Links ]


Submetido em:
11/12/2018

Aceito em:
19/04/2019

5ddec0800e8825b1127279a1 codas Articles

CoDAS

Share this page
Page Sections