Publication practices of English language occupational therapy journals

The aim of this study was to determine the characteristics and publication practices of English language occupational therapy journals. An adapted version of the Survey of Editors Regarding Publishing Practices was posted to the editors of English language occupational therapy journals (n = 14) in September 2001. The response rate was 92.9% (n = 13). Journals were published on average 4.77 times per year and comprised 89% text and 10% advertising. The preferred average length of manuscripts was 20 pages using American Psychological Association format. The average acceptance rate of unsolicited manuscripts was 46.6%. All the journals were peer-reviewed publications and 80% were research oriented. The most frequently cited reasons for rejection of manuscripts were methodology problems, poorly developed idea, poorly written and data interpretation problems. The professional focus of published manuscripts was on research and the clinical foci were on paediatrics, gerontology and physical medicine. The study concludes that there are a variety of publishing opportunities available to occupational therapists. It is essential that prospective authors consult the journal guidelines for authors, including the types of manuscript accepted.

Successes and failures in assessing acquired language disorders using an Internet-based telerehabilitation system

We have used a telerehabilitation system (eREHAB) to remotely assess acquired language disorders via the Internet. The system was used to establish a 128 kbit/s videoconference between two sites and allowed a remote language assessment to be conducted using the standardized Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination (BDAE). The system had the capacity to display text and images, and could play pre-recorded instructions to the participant via various built-in tools. A touch screen allowed tasks involving picture identification to be completed easily. Eighteen participants with a diagnosis of an acquired language disorder were simultaneously assessed using the eREHAB system, and in the traditional face-to-face manner by two speech pathologists. There was very high agreement between the two assessors, with weighted kappa scores of 0.8–1.0 for 88% of the sub-tests of the BDAE. There was also high agreement (80–100%) and high kappa scores (0.67–0.90) between assessors on the six rating scales relating to language characteristics. The agreement between the two assessors for the diagnosis of the type of aphasia was 83%. Limitations of the system related mainly to problems inherent in IP videoconferencing. The inability to maintain the preferred speed of 128 kbit/s for the duration of the videoconference and the resultant increase in video and audio breakup and latency affected the clinician’s ability to administer the BDAE with the same ease and accuracy as in face-to-face administration. These difficulties were exacerbated when participants presented with a moderate to severe language disorder, auditory comprehension deficits or significant hearing loss. Despite these limitations, a valid assessment of language disorder was found to be feasible via this telerehabilitation application.