What question did this study set out to answer?

To develop and standardize a shortened version of the Minnesota Differential Diagnosis of Aphasia Test for rapid general aphasia screening.

June 1, 1980British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

A very short version of the Minnesota Aphasia Test

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

To develop and standardize a shortened version of the Minnesota Differential Diagnosis of Aphasia Test for rapid general aphasia screening.
Standardized the abbreviated battery on 86 patients diagnosed with aphasia.
Reduced the original 43 subtests to four selected subtests: serial object identification (A4), oral reading of words (B8), picture naming (C13), and written spelling (D6).
Reduced testing time to under 15 minutes while achieving a correlation of r > 0.9 with the complete 43-subtest examination.
Misclassified 13% of subjects for generalized aphasia identification, although full typological partitioning requires the complete battery.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

Diagnostic study demonstrates high accuracy for an abbreviated four-subtest battery in aphasic patients, indicating efficient general screening in under fifteen minutes.

Cite This Study

Powell et al. (1980) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aaf286f318d26df9925cd83 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8260.1980.tb00947.x

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Diagnostic study demonstrates high accuracy for an abbreviated four-subtest battery in aphasic patients, indicating efficient general screening in under fifteen minutes.

A very short version of the Minnesota Aphasia Test

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

A very short version of the Minnesota Aphasia Test

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider