Western Aphasia Battery-Revised

When a customer is interpreting a Bedside WAB-R score there aren’t severity descriptors like there are for the AQ on page 83, right? On page 84, it states, “Interpretation of the sections and tasks are consistent with the full test”.

Based on the author’s expertise, the Bedside Aphasia Score should correlate to the full diagnostic test Aphasia Quotient. If this is true, then the Bedside Aphasia Score can be interpreted using the severity ratings supplied for the Aphasia Quotient; however, the severity rating obtained using the Bedside Aphasia Score can only be interpreted as an indicator of the severity rating that could be expected if the full test was administered and an Aphasia Quotient obtained.

How should I use the three different quotient scores (Aphasia Quotient, Language Quotient, and Cortical Quotient) in my test interpretation?

The interpretation guidance for each quotient is outlined in the test manual, pages 83-84. Essentially, these three composite scores represent a narrow vs wide view of the examinee's performance across one or more domain(s) during the test administration. The Aphasia Quotient (AQ), represents the most narrow view of performance — it relates specifically to those oral language tasks that are impacted by aphasia. More broadly, the Language Quotient (LQ) relates to oral language and written language together. Finally, the Cortical Quotient (CQ) relates to the entire cognitive-linguistic performance of the examinee during the administration, using the entire set of linguistic and nonlinguistic domains. With these different views of examinee performance and a detailed case history, you can tease out a profile of strengths and weaknesses in the examinee and make a plan of care.

May I use the raw performance (X out of X correct) on any given subtest in my report?

At most, you could report that the examinee performed "X of X items correct" for a given subtest. This would be descriptive information only. You would not be able to say with any reliability or validity that a raw score performance had any comparison to any other individual that may have been assessed or subtest that may have been given. Make any interpretive statements about raw score performance with great caution and acknowledgement of the lack of comparison ability.

What is the difference between these items?

WAB-R Q-global Remote-Adapted Stimulus Book (Digital) A103000232039,

WAB-R Q-global Stimulus Book (Digital) A103000232038,

WAB-R Q-global Stimulus Book and Remote-Adapted Stimulus Book (Digital) A103000232048

There are now two different versions of the WAB-R stim books. The first one (i.e., the Remote-Adapted Version) has two item changes to accommodate remote delivery better. The second one is the original one, with no changes from paper publication. Customers can use the new one (Remote-Adapted) for remote assessment/telepractice delivery. They could also choose to use the original one for digital delivery of stimuli in an in-person assessment. The combo kit of the two stimulus books gives you both versions.

What are the actual changes? Please refer to the WAB-R guidance document for details, but in short: there is an image of a field of the manipulatives inserted for a series of item responses, and one item is altered to refer to a finger (which you can easily see) vs a foot (which is a bit more awkward for an adult to get above the tabletop). Because there was a direct equivalency study on WAB-R with these adaptations, we wanted to honor the equivalency procedure while retaining the original version of the stimulus book.