Face and Content Validation of the 10-Item Communicative Participation Item Bank General Short Form for Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Cognitive Interviewing Study.
Ollie Fegter, Sara Shaunfield, Matthew Bona and 3 others
PMID 41105959WHAT IT FOUND
People with PPA and their partners found the 10-item CPIB mostly clear but wanted a middle response option and phone use added.
One item on persuasion was seen as irrelevant. Familiarity with the test did not change feedback.
Key findings
01Participants generally understood the CPIB items and instructions, but many requested a fifth response option to better capture moderate difficulty.
02Talking on the phone was the most frequently cited missing communication situation, reported by two-thirds of the participants.
03Item 10, regarding persuading others to see a different point of view, was rated as less relevant and uncommon by both patients and partners.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample size was small (9 dyads), limiting generalizability. The study only included individuals with mild-to-moderate PPA, so findings may not apply to those with severe impairments. The eligibility cutoff for language severity (WAB-R AQ) was changed during the study from 75 to 80, which complicates interpretation. The sample was predominantly White, highly educated, and English-speaking. Familiarity with the measure was not fully controlled, although no major differences in feedback were observed between naïve and familiar dyads.
Declared interests
The research was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH/NIA) and the Canada Research Chair program. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the CPIB is fully validated for all PPA severities or that the current 10-item short form captures all key participation barriers like phone use. The request for a fifth response option is a preference from a small sample, not a proven psychometric improvement, and the study did not test whether these modifications actually enhance measurement precision.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →