The relationship between specific features of aphasia-friendly written material and comprehension of written material for people with aphasia: An exploratory study
Abstract
Background : Written material is often inaccessible for people with aphasia. The format of written material needs to be adapted to enable people with aphasia to read with understanding. Aims : This study aimed to further explore some issues raised in Rose, Worrall, and McKenna (2003) concerning the effects of aphasia-friendly formats on the reading comprehension of people with aphasia. It was hypothesised that people with aphasia would comprehend significantly more paragraphs that were formatted in an aphasia-friendly manner than control paragraphs. This study also aimed to investigate if each single aspect of aphasia-friendly formatting (i.e., simplified vocabulary and syntax, large print, increased white space, and pictures) used in isolation would result in increased comprehension compared to control paragraphs. Other aims were to compare the effect of aphasia-friendly formatting with the effect of each single adaptation, and to investigate if the effects of aphasia-friendly formats were related to aphasia severity. Methods & Procedures : Participants with mild to moderately severe aphasia (N = 9) read a battery of 90 paragraphs and selected the best word or phrase from a choice of four to complete each paragraph. A linear mixed model (p < .05) was used to analyse the differences in reading comprehension with each paragraph format across three reading grade levels. Outcomes & Results : People with aphasia comprehended significantly more aphasia-friendly paragraphs than control paragraphs. They also comprehended significantly more paragraphs with each of the following single adaptations: simplified vocabulary and syntax, large print, and increased white space. Although people with aphasia tended to comprehend more paragraphs with pictures added than control paragraphs, this difference was not significant. No significant correlation between aphasia severity and the effect of aphasia-friendly formatting was found. Conclusions : This study supports the idea that aphasia-friendly formats increase the reading comprehension of people with aphasia. It suggests that adding pictures, particularly Clip Art pictures, may not significantly improve the reading comprehension of people with aphasia. These findings have implications for all written communication with people with aphasia, both in the clinical setting and in the wider community. Applying these findings may enable people with aphasia to have equal access to written information and to participation in society.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The literature recommends using bullet points, bolded keywords, headings, and signposting for developing visualizations for people with communication difficulties.
“We also prioritized using bullet points, bolded keywords, headings, and signposting, as recommended in the literature [3, 7, 56] for developing visualizations for people with communication difficulties in our designs.”
From A Data Visualization Tool for Patients and Healthcare Providers to Communicate during Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation (2024) · cites this paper as [7]
Cites
Acquired alexia: Lessons from successful treatment
BEESON, P. M., & INSALACO, D. (1998) · Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society · doi:10.1017/s1355617798466116 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mobile computing technology and aphasia: an integrated review of accessibility and potential uses
Brandenburg, C., Worrall, L., Rodriguez, A. D., & Copland, D. (2013) · Aphasiology · doi:10.1080/02687038.2013.772293 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Self-citationShrubsole, K., Worrall, L., Power, E., & O’Connor, D. A. (2017) · Aphasiology · doi:10.1080/02687038.2016.1143083 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Self-citationRamesh, S. H., Ouskine, A., Khorasani, E., Ebrahimipour, M., Finestone, H., Chan, A. D. C., & Rajabiyazdi, F. (2024) · Graphics Interface · doi:10.1145/3670947.3670978 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brennan, A., Worrall, L., & McKenna, K.
- Affiliations
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- ORCID
- Worrall, Linda
- Venue
- Aphasiology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-08
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 693-711
- ISSN
- 0268-7038 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5041
- OpenAlex
- W1964757121
- Cited by
- 134
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 13.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Aphasiology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- aphasia, reading comprehension, text simplification, large print, white space, aphasia severity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review