Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31398300›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2019

The Voicemail Elicitation Task: Functional Workplace Language Assessment for Persons With Traumatic Brain Injury.

Peter Meulenbroek, Leora R Cherney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peter MeulenbroekCollege of Health Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
Leora R CherneyShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL.
Northwestern University · USUniversity of Kentucky · US

Funding

Communication Ability and Work Re-Entry in Adults with Brain InjuryF31DC011462 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI MEULENBROEK, PETER ANDREW · 2011 to 2012
$60k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC011462
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose Politeness markers (PMs) are words that enhance cooperativity in dialogue and are an essential component of professional/work communication. Persons with moderate/severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) underuse PMs in connected speech and have employment stability issues. The voicemail elicitation task (VET) is a standardized computerized language sampling procedure measuring PM rate in role-play tasks. Our purpose is to provide preliminary data establishing the potential of a screening assessment tool for professional/work communication. Method We measured VET performance using spoken PMs per minute (PMpM). We present data from 63 persons. Forty-three participants with TBI (22-65 years old, ≥ 1-year postinjury) worked in midlevel jobs before their injury and attempted work return after injury at the same job level. Twenty participants with TBI did not maintain work > 1 year (unstably employed), and 23 did maintain work for ≥ 1 year (stably employed). Twenty controls without history of neurological impairment working at the same job level also completed the VET protocol. We analyzed the data using between-group comparison with 1-way analysis of variance and post hoc analysis. We used receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to calculate sensitivity and specificity, as well as an optimal cutoff value for a screening measure. Results Group differences,

Indexed as

Language TestsWork Capacity EvaluationAdultBrain Injuries, TraumaticCommunicationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReturn to WorkWorkplaceYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31398300
PMCPMC6808339
OpenAlexW2968237633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.