Back

The Progressive Aphasia Communication Toolkit (PACT): A Strengths-Based Approach to Multidomain Evaluation for Intervention

Gallee, J.; Cartwright, J.; Henry, M. L.; Mooney, A.; Stark, B. C.; Volkmer, A.; Dietz, A.; Nakano, C.; Battista, P.; Beales, A.; Beber, B. C.; Cadorio, I.; Caldwell, M.; Davies, K.; Ezzes, Z.; Gauch, M.; Graney, T.; Grobler, S.; Haley, K.; Hausmann, A.; Herrera, E.; Hubbard, H. I.; Jokel, R.; Kot, L.; Lowe, M.; McGowan, E.; Meteyard, L.; Montagut, N.; Nowenstein, I.; Pozzebon, M.; Talbot, R.; Taylor, C.; Walker, F.; Winsnes, I. E.; Fredericksen, R. J.; Domoto-Reilly, K.; Crane, P. K.

2025-12-04 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.64898/2025.11.25.25340904 medRxiv
Show abstract

INTRODUCTIONTools to document communicative ability in people living with primary progressive aphasia (PwPPA) are limited. This work describes the development of a strengths-based and ecologically-valid instrument--the Progressive Aphasia Communication Toolkit (PACT). METHODSThis work consisted of five experiments: two to develop (Experiments 1 and 2) and three to pilot (Experiments 3-5) a novel instrument for PPA. Ninety-five individuals worldwide contributed to this work: 80 researchers and clinicians, 9 PwPPA, and 6 care partners. RESULTSExperiments 1-2 culminated in an instrument comprising four scales that capture quantitative and qualitative feedback. Experiments 3-5 resulted in structural refinement and digitization of the tool, revealed PwPPA and care partner preference for the PACT over traditional neuropsychological evaluation, and demonstrated strong inter-rater agreement for general measurability (91%) and strength ratings (85%). DISCUSSIONCurrent findings indicate that the PACT provides a holistic profile of communication strengths for PwPPA and can guide clinicians in developing functional therapeutic targets.

Published in Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.