Language rights and publication practices in aphasia research: lessons learned from developing aphasia assessments in multiple languages

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background Although people with aphasia should receive rehabilitation services on an equal basis to others, irrespective of their cultural and linguistic backgrounds, the current research on aphasia does not adequately reflect the diversity of cultures and languages worldwide.Aims This paper aims to discuss language rights and the impact of giving preference to publishing aphasia research and clinical resources in English. We present an example of researchers adapting an aphasia assessment, the Comprehensive Aphasia Test (CAT), to diverse languages and cultures as a lens for language rights.Methods & Procedures The paper discusses the language rights of people with aphasia regarding language of assessment and intervention. To provide a concrete lens on the fulfilment of language rights in publishing aphasia assessments, a survey was designed to examine the experiences of researchers adapting the CAT to diverse languages and cultures. The survey comprised ten questions about their adaptation experiences from the initial language selection to the time of publication. The survey results are discussed in terms of linguistic justice.Outcomes & Results We obtained responses from eight languages to which the CAT has been adapted (Norwegian, Catalan, Spanish, Mandarin, Swedish, Turkish, Cantonese Chinese, and Croatian). Most CAT adaptations were driven by the pressing need to develop assessments in a primary or widely spoken language. The timeline of the adaptation process shows the complexity and time-consuming task of adapting aphasia assessments. Major challenges to the adaptation process include funding, lack of publisher guidelines, and the existence of databases with specific linguistic features.Conclusions There is a pressing need to address barriers to equal access to aphasia evidence. International collaborations are attempting to address the lack of a worldwide clinical and research workforce in aphasia, however structural barriers to research dissemination and publishing in diverse languages must be urgently addressed to realise language rights in aphasiology.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.