• Korean Journal of Biological Psychiatry
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.70-77
• /
• 2021

Objectives Our study aimed to present the distinctive correlates of formal thought disorder in patients with schizophrenia, using the Clinical Language Disorder Rating Scale (CLANG). Methods We compared clinical characteristics between schizophrenia patients with (n = 84) and without (n = 82) formal thought disorder. Psychometric scales including the CLANG, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), the Calgery Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) and the Word Fluency Test (WFT) were used. Results After adjusting the effects of age, sex and total scores on the BPRS, YMRS and WFT, the subjects with disorganized speech presented significantly higher score on the abnormal syntax (p = 0.009), lack of semantic association (p = 0.005), discourse failure (p < 0.0001), pragmatics disorder (p = 0.001), dysarthria (p < 0.0001), and paraphasic error (p = 0.005) items than those without formal thought disorder. With defining the mentioned item scores as covariates, binary logistic regression model predicted that discourse failure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.88, p < 0.0001) and pragmatics disorder (aOR = 2.17, p = 0.04) were distinctive correlates of formal thought disorder in patients with schizophrenia. Conclusions This study conducted Clinician Rated Dimensions of Psychosis Symptom Severity (CRDPSS) and CLANG scales on 166 hospitalized schizophrenia patients to explore the sub-items of the CLANG scale independently related to formal thought disorders in schizophrenia patients. Discourse failure and pragmatics disorder might be used as the distinctive indexes for formal thought disorder in patients with schizophrenia.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.349-358
• /
• 2024

This study conducted a literature analysis to examine the overall trend of speech-language pathology in discourse research, focusing on studies on the topic of discourse from 2010 to 2023. Twenty-five papers were selected and analyzed in terms of research status, research subjects (age and subject type), and research methods (type and task). As a result, first, looking at the annual status of discourse research, it was confirmed that it is increasing starting from 2015 compared to 2010 to 2014. Second, the age of the research subjects and the types of experimental and control groups in the experimental study were examined. First, when analyzing the age of the subjects, research was actively conducted on school-age subjects (12 studies, 48.00%). When looking at the analysis of the types of experimental group subjects, the Normal group was the most (4 studies (19.04%)), and the control group subject type was also conducted with Normal as the control group (13 studies (61.90%)). It was the most. Third, in the analysis of research methods, it was found that the research type was very biased towards experimental studies, with 21 studies (84.00%). The type of research in terms of time was cross-sectional studies, which accounted for a high proportion of 21 studies (84.00%), and the research project used to evaluate discourse ability with a high proportion was discourse production, with a total of 12 studies (48.00%). This study comprehensively looked at discourse-related research related to language development and language disorders and sought to identify recent trends and the direction in which discourse-related research should move. The analysis of this study was limited to domestic papers. In follow-up research, we hope to understand the flow of research and discuss it, including overseas research related to discourse.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.201-207
• /
• 2024

In this study, we investigated the current status of written discourse mediation in a more general and in-depth manner, including the training completion experience and knowledge of written discourse mediation among Speech-Language Pathologists in Korea, and the Speech-Language Pathologists' perceptions of written discourse mediation. We wanted to look into the requirements. Research results were derived through a questionnaire answered by 110 Speech-Language Pathologists. As a result, although most Speech-Language Pathologists learned about written discourse intervention in the curriculum, their application of written discourse intervention in clinical settings is insufficient and they have difficulty with written discourse intervention due to lack of systematic and professional knowledge of this intervention. I could tell that I was feeling it. Looking at the status of written discourse intervention, only 46.4% of the Speech-Language Pathologists who responded in clinical settings showed that they had experience with written discourse intervention. In other words, it was analyzed that 53.6% of respondents had no experience with writing discourse mediation. As a result of Speech-Language Pathologists' perception and demand for written discourse intervention, 76.4% of SpeechLanguage Pathologists responded that they thought written discourse intervention was an important area of speech therapy. In addition, 62.8% of respondents responded that a curriculum for discourse mediation is necessary, more than 90% said that continuous research on written discourse mediation is necessary, and 89.1% thought that the development of textbooks and teaching aids was necessary.This study is significant in that it investigated the experiences and perceptions of Speech-Language Pathologists in written discourse intervention and analyzed the results in that it provided direction on how education and various processes related to written discourse intervention should be conducted.