ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders
Efficacy of online communication partner training package for student healthcare professionals.
Article in International journal of language & communication disorders. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technology-based teaching to support health students' clinical skills in stroke recovery: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Communication partner training for aged-care workers: A scoping review.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
- Creating opportunities to communicate and connect in a global pandemic: Exploring the experiences of people with aphasia of an online conversation partner scheme.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
- Understanding the Care Needs of People With Post-Stroke Aphasia: A Qualitative Study of Stroke Care Transitions.Global qualitative nursing researchArticle
- Intersection of Knowledge to Practice: A Purposeful Integration of Communication Partner Training in Aphasia With Adult Learning Principles for Healthcare Students.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
- Improving Care for People With Aphasia: Communication Training for Healthcare Providers.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople with aphasia are vulnerable recipients of healthcare. The nature of the communicative environment and the communication disability can adversely impact access to timely and quality healthcare. Student healthcare professionals are often underprepared to interact successfully with people with aphasia and may benefit from communication partner training (CPT).
aimsTo investigate the potential effectiveness and acceptability of a brief, two-part introductory Supported Conversation for Adults with Aphasia (SCA™)-based CPT package, delivered to a sample of students across a diverse range of healthcare disciplines. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A pre-post-within group experimental design was used to investigate the potential effectiveness and acceptability of an online CPT package (50 minute module + 1 hour workshop) for healthcare students. The Aphasia Attitudes, Strategies and Knowledge (AASK) survey measured participants' knowledge of aphasia, facilitative communication strategies and attitudes towards people with aphasia. Data were collected pre-training, following the training module and following the workshop, and 6 weeks post-training. Statistical analysis was conducted on the AASK data. In addition, participant feedback (ratings and open text responses) was collected after the workshop. Ratings were analysed descriptively, and thematic content analysis was used for open text responses. OUTCOMES &
results236 participants completed the pre-training AASK and 106 completed the AASK at subsequent time points. Statistically significant gains were demonstrated from pre- to post-module completion. Between the end of the module and the end of the workshop, some gains were maintained and others showed further statistically significantly improvements. While all gains were not maintained at the 6-week follow-up, statistically significantly improvements from pre-training scores remained evident. Student feedback was predominantly positive, with suggested improvements for training content and length. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The results provide preliminary evidence that a brief, online CPT package can support student healthcare professionals' knowledge and attitudes towards aphasia and communicating with people with aphasia. Online training was acceptable to students and feasible as an embedded or optional component of curriculum. Ongoing training (e.g., in the form of refresher sessions) and inclusion of a skills-based component are recommended to maximize communication skill development. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Student healthcare professionals recognize the need to develop knowledge and skills to successfully support people with communication disability, such as aphasia, to participate effectively in their healthcare. Evidence in favour of online communication partner training for student healthcare professionals is currently limited. What this study adds to the existing knowledge This study demonstrates that a brief introductory online communication partner training program can be efficacious for improving knowledge and attitudes regarding communicating with people who have aphasia. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Students will likely need further ongoing refresher training with inclusion of practical components to develop and maintain the knowledge and skills required to be proficient communication partners with people with aphasia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.