PURPOSE: Evaluation of the Naming and Oral Reading for Language in Aphasia 6-point scale (NORLA-6), a scoring system of oral reading and naming performance in aphasia. METHOD: Data were drawn from 91 participants with non-fluent aphasia secondary to left-hemisphere stroke across four treatment studies. To assess validity, Spearman's correlations were calculated between the NORLA-6 and the Gray Oral Reading Test-Fourth Edition (GORT-4) Accuracy score, GORT-4 Rate score and the Boston Naming Test (BNT). Inter-rater and test-retest reliability were evaluated using correlations. Sensitivity to change following oral reading intervention was analysed using Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests between pre- and post-treatment NORLA-6 scores. RESULT: = 0.92). Inter-rater (ICC ≥0.90) and test-retest (r > 0.92) reliability were both excellent. Sensitivity following oral reading intervention was demonstrated in both oral reading accuracy and rate (p < 0.004). CONCLUSION: The NORLA-6 is a valid and reliable measure of oral reading and naming performance. It also demonstrates sensitivity to change in treatment-targeted behaviours. Therefore, the NORLA-6 scale may enhance outcome measurement in both clinical practice and aphasia research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pitts et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: