These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Models and frameworks for guiding assessment for aided Augmentative and Alternative communication (AAC): a scoping review.
    Author: Burnham SPL, Finak P, Henderson JT, Gaurav N, Batorowicz B, Pinder SD, Davies TC.
    Journal: Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2024 May; 19(4):1758-1772. PubMed ID: 37435920.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) supports individuals with complex communication needs. Conceptual models and frameworks exist to evaluate, implement, and assess the needs of persons with communication disabilities, however, it is unknown which models were grounded in previous evidence-based research. OBJECTIVE: What are the models and frameworks grounded in empirical or conceptual research that enable communication outcomes for persons who require aided AAC systems? ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The study had to be the original publication of a defined model or framework that included aided AAC and the model had to be developed through research, either conceptual or empirical. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Eleven databases were searched using terms associated with AAC devices, conceptual models, and assessment processes. Fifteen articles presenting 14 independent assessment models were included. CHARTING METHODS: A custom data extraction form included model development using existing models and research evidence, the model's input parameters, and explicit outcome measures. RESULTS: Four models were specific to AAC while ten models were general evaluations for assistive technology systems. Models used a variety of descriptive traits during assessment including: person, technology, environment and context, and the activity or task. Only nine models sought to iteratively assess the client. Eleven of the models identified the inclusion of members from different disciplines in the assessment process. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to standardize descriptive traits: personal abilities, environmental characteristics, potential assistive technology, and contextual factors. Models should include teams of different disciplines to provide holistic assessments. Models should include outcomes and include iterative solutions. Standardizing the definitions of descriptive traits used in the assessment of the personal abilities, environmental characteristics, potential assistive technology, and contextual factors would enable better evaluation of outcomes across disciplines and abilities.By identifying what factors are instrumental in the successful recommendation of assistive technology, professionals may achieve a well-organized and efficient assessment tool.An assessment model tailored specifically to individuals who may benefit from Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) should be considered that are rooted in existing theories, research evidence, and the experiences of those in the AAC community.An AAC specific model would allow for consistent outcome tracking across individuals or assessment teams and the comparison of the effectiveness of various models for research purposes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]