{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04307334109429569, 'fraction_numerical': 0.024447031431897557, 'mean_word_length': 5.2270531400966185, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Does type of aphasia impact change on the Communication Confidence Rating Scale for Aphasia (CCRSA)?

Background: Communication confidence is a psychological construct that may improve following language treatment. Ross, Winslow, Marchant, and Brumfitt (2006) conducted a small study examining outcomes from a group treatment model. They noted that scores on self-esteem measures did not change significantly, but improved confidence was remarked on by all the participants in an informal survey after the study. Corsten, Konradi, Schimpf, Hardering, and Keilmann (2014) found that self-reported measures of life-satisfaction did not change following treatment; however, self-confidence and communication were rated higher. In a survey of practicing clinicians, 99% of clinicians agreed or strongly agreed that addressing confidence along with psychological well-being was important (Northcott, Simpson, Moss, Ahmed, & Hilari, 2016). While there is consensus that it is important to measure changes in communication confidence following treatment, the Communication Confidence Rating Scale for Adults (CCRSA) is currently the only standardized measure of communication confidence for persons with aphasia (Babbitt, Heinemann, Semik, & Cherney, 2011). It is increasingly being used across research studies, but it is unknown if persons with different types of aphasia respond differently on the measure. Aims: The purpose of this studywas to explorewhether: (1) the CCRSAmeasures changes in communication confidence following different treatments and (2) persons with different types of aphasia (non-fluent and fluent) report similar changes on the CCRSA. Methods: We examined preto posttreatment performance on the Communication Confidence Rating Scale for Aphasia (CCRSA) by 215 subjects who took part in different research studies that lasted 6 weeks or a clinical intensive aphasia program that lasted 4 weeks. A total of 151 of the participants had non-fluent aphasia and 64 participants had fluent aphasia. Ages ranged from 18 to 86 years (mean = 55.3, SD = 14.3), months postonset ranged from 3 to 188 months (mean = 23.3, SD = 26.3), and the Western Aphasia Battery – Revised Aphasia Quotient (WAB-R AQ) scores ranged from 7 to 92.1/100 (mean = 56.5, SD = 20.9). A general linear model (GLM) approach was used. Results: At baseline, the non-fluent and fluent aphasia groups differed significantly on age, months post-onset, and WAB-R AQ. However, there was no significant difference in CCRSA scores for the non-fluent and fluent aphasia groups. All participants improved