The Apraxia of Speech Rating Scale: Reliability, Validity, and Utility.
Joseph R Duffy, Peter R Martin, Heather M Clark and 4 others
PMID 36630926WHAT IT FOUND
The Apraxia of Speech Rating Scale reliably distinguishes apraxia from aphasia and dysarthria in neurodegenerative populations.
A total score of 11 or higher strongly indicates apraxia, while 6 or lower suggests its absence. Scores between 7 and 10 require clinical judgment, as reliability depends on rater experience.
Key findings
01Interrater reliability for the Total score was excellent, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of .98.
02A Total score of 11 or higher indicates a greater than 90% likelihood of apraxia, while a score of 6 or lower indicates a greater than 90% likelihood of its absence.
03The number of abnormal features rated as present was predictive of a clinical diagnosis, with no participant without apraxia showing abnormalities on more than seven items.
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 study population consisted entirely of individuals with neurodegenerative conditions, so results may not apply to apraxia caused by stroke or other conditions. Reliability was established using experienced raters; results may not hold for clinicians new to the scale or without specific apraxia expertise. Participants generally had mild to moderate severity, and the scale may not be valid for severe cases where speech samples are unobtainable or unratable. One item, lengthened segments, showed poor interrater reliability and may be difficult to score consistently.
Declared interests
Funding was provided by the National Institutes of Health. No commercial conflicts of interest were reported.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this scale is equally reliable for stroke patients or inexperienced raters. The high reliability reported depends on expert judgment and a neurodegenerative cohort, and scores between 7 and 10 are not diagnostic on their own.