Screening for Language Disorders in Stroke: German Validation of the Language Screening Test (LAST)

BACKGROUND Screening of aphasia in acute stroke is crucial for directing patients to early language therapy. The Language Screening Test (LAST), originally developed in French, is a validated language screening test that allows detection of a language deficit within a few minutes. The aim of the present study was to develop and validate two parallel German versions of the LAST. METHODS The LAST includes subtests for naming, repetition, automatic speech, and comprehension. For the translation into German, task constructs and psycholinguistic criteria for item selection were identical to the French LAST. A cohort of 101 stroke patients were tested, all of whom were native German speakers. Validation of the LAST was based on (1) analysis of equivalence of the German versions, which was established by administering both versions successively in a subset of patients, (2) internal validity by means of internal consistency analysis, and (3) external validity by comparison with the short version of the Token Test in another subset of patients. RESULTS The two German versions were equivalent as demonstrated by a high intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.91. Furthermore, an acceptable internal structure of the LAST was found (Cronbach's α = 0.74). A highly significant correlation (r = 0.74, p < 0.0001) between the LAST and the short version of the Token Test indicated good external validity of the scale. CONCLUSION The German version of the LAST, available in two parallel versions, is a new and valid language screening test in stroke.

Publication activities of German junior researchers in academic medicine: which factors impact impact factors?

Previous studies have shown medical students in Germany to have little interest in research while at the same time there is a lack of physician scientists. This study’s aim is to investigate factors influencing publication productivity of physicians during and after finishing their medical doctorate. We conducted a PubMed search for physicians having received their doctoral degree at Ludwig-Maxmilians-University Munich Faculty of Medicine between 2011 and 2013 (N = 924) and identified the appropriate impact factor (IF) for each journal the participants had published in. Gender, age, final grade of the doctorate, participation in a structured doctoral study program and joint publication activities between graduate and academic supervisor were defined as factors. For analyses we used nonparametric procedures. Men show significantly more publications than women. Before their doctoral graduation men publish 1.98 (SD ± 3.64) articles on average, women 1.15 (±2.67) (p < 0.0001, d = 0.27). After completion of the doctorate (up to 06/2015), 40 % of men still publish, while only 24.3 % of women (p < 0.0001, φ = 0.17) continue to publish. No differences were found concerning the value of IFs. Similar results were found regarding the variable ‘participation in a structured doctoral study program’. Until doctoral graduation, program participants publish 2.82 (±5.41) articles, whereas participants doing their doctorate individually only publish 1.39 (±2.87) articles (p < 0.0001, d = 0.46). These differences persist in publication activities after graduation (45.5 vs. 29.7 %, p = 0.008, φ = 0.09). A structured doctorate seems to have positive influence on IFs (4.33 ± 2.91 vs. 3.37 ± 2.82, p = 0.006, d = 0.34). Further significant results concern the variables ‘final grade’ and ‘age’: An early doctoral graduation and an excellent or very good grade for the doctoral thesis positively influence publication productivity. Finally, joint publication activities between the graduate and his/her academic supervisor result in significantly higher IFs (3.64 ± 3.03 vs. 2.84 ± 2.25, p = 0.007, d = 0.28). The study’s results support the assumption about women’s underrepresentation in science as well as the relevance of structured doctoral study programs for preparing and recruiting young academics in medicine for scientific careers. Promoting women and further development of structured doctoral study programs are highly recommended.