Purpose: There are many different assessment, evaluation and intervention methods in speech and language field. Recently World Health Organization (WHO) proposed International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health -Children and Youth (ICF-CY) classifications present holistic framework which consider body functioning, body part, activity, participation and environmental factors to capture wellness and functioning of the clients. In speech and language assessments, speech and language pathologists (SLPs) mostly consider body functioning and body parts but have limited tools to assess participation which reflects the effect on real life situations. Consequently, SLPs need tools to measure communicative skills and participation in assessment processes and following speech and language interventions to meet the holistic point of ICF–CY's proposed by WHO. In line with this need, Focus on Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS) is developed, a communicative output- oriented assessment for children before the age of six. FOCUS primarily measures ‘communicative participation’ for preschool children by assessing communication and interaction adequacy on real life situations such as at home, school or in community. Considering Turkish literature, due to lack of tools to provide ICF holistic framework and communicative participation, FOCUS has been adapted to Turkish (FOCUS-TR). There are two available versions of the FOCUS: one designed for the speech-language pathologist and one for the parent. In this research it was aimed to investigate the internal and external reliability of the FOCUS-TR parent scale. Method: 30 literate parents (mother or father) were included this study. The FOCUS-TR was administered to the same parent with an interval of one week. In data analysis; test-retest, internal consistency and split-half reliability were analyzed using Paired Sample t-Test, Pearson correlation analysis, and Cronbach (CA) coefficient. Results: The difference between the FOCUS-TR total test and retest scores was evaluated with the paired t-test and no statistically significant difference was found (p=0.891). There was high level correlation between the test and re-test scores of the FOCUS-TR total score (r=0.918, p<0.05). CA was calculated for both test and re-test. In the initial test, FOCUS-TR total score CA value was excellent (=0.962), re-test CA value was excellent (=0.970). Internal consistency of test and retest scores was analyzed with split-half test reliability. Split half reliability analysis was analyzed for both test and re-test. The initial test (rS=0.902) and the re- test (rS=0.933) were good half split reliability. Conclusion: FOCUS-TR, which is Turkish adaptation of FOCUS, has a high reliability.
speech and language therapy, participation, FOCUS-TR, ICF-CY, communicative output, intervention
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5. baskı.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596
Büyüköztürk, S. (2020). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (27. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
CanChild (2021). Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS). https://canchild.ca/en/shop/29-focus adresinden alınmıştır. (Erişim tarihi: 11.10.2021).
Hammell K., & Carpenter C. (2000). Introduction to qualitative research in occupational therapy and physical therapy. Using qualitative research: a practical introduction for occupational and physical therapist. NewYork: Churchill Livingstone.
Hayhow, R., Lindsay, G., Rouldsone, S, ve White, P. (2012). Prospective cohort study of speech and language therapy services for young who stutter in England. UK Department of Education Research. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/21962 9/DFE-RR247-BCRP16.pdf
İnal, H. C., & Günay S. (2013). Olasılık ve matematiksel istatistik (7. baskı). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Jette, A., & Haley, S. (2005). Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37(6), 339-345.
Kılıç S. (2016). Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. Journal of Mood Disorders, 6(1), 47. doi:10.5455/jmood.20160307122823
Konrot, A. (2020). Beyin odaklı dil ve konuşma terapisi. O. Tanrıdağ (Ed.), Nörobilim ve Dil ve Konuşma Bozuklukları içinde (s. 201-230). Nobel Tıp Kitapevi.
Maviş, İ., Colay, K., Topbaş, S., ve Tanrıdağ, O. (2007). Standardization, validity and reliability study of Gülhane Aphasia Test-2 (GAT-2). Turkish Journal of Neurology, 13(2),89-98.
McCormack, J., McLeod, S., Harrison, L. J., ve McAllister, L. (2010). The impact of speech impairment in early childhood: Investigating parents’ and speech-language pathologists’ perspectives using the ICF- CY. Journal of Communication Disorders, 43(5), 378-396.
McCormack, J., McLeod, S., McAllister, L., ve Harrison, L. J. (2009). A systematic review of the association between childhood speech impairment and participation across the lifespan. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11(2), 155-170.
McLeod, S., & McKinnon, D. H. (2007). Prevalence of communication disorders compared with other learning needs in 14,500 primary and secondary school students. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 42(S1), 37-59.
Mutlu, A. İ., Tırank, Ş. B., ve Gündüz, B. (2020). 6 ve 16 yaş okul çocukları arasındaki SSI-4-TR/Keşida-4 dördüncü baskının Türkçe versiyonunun güvenirliği ve geçerliliği. Izmir Democracy University Health Sciences Journal, 3(2), 135-144.
Mutlu, A. İ. (2021). Çocukluk Çağı Kekemeliğini Değerlendirme Testinin (Test of Childhood Stuttering) Türkçe’ye Uyarlanması, Geçerlilik ve Güvenirliğinin Araştırılması. [Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi] Haceettepe Üniversitesi.
Namasivayam, A. K., Pukonen, M., Goshulak, D., Hard, J., Rudziczs, F., Rietveld, T., Baassen, B., Kroll, R, ve Van Lieshout, P (2015). Treatment intensity and childhood apraxia of speech. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 50(4), 529-546.
Namasivayam, A., Huynh, A., Granata, F., Law, V., ve van Lieshout, P. (2020). PROMPT intervention for children with severe speech motor delay: a randomized control trial. Pediatric Research, 89(3), 613- 621. doi: 10.1038/s41390-020-0924-4
Neumann, S., Salm, S., Rietz, C., ve Stenneken, P. (2017). The German Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS-G): Reliability and validity of a novel assessment of communicative participation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(3), 675-681.
Piazzalunga, S., Salerni, N., Limarzi, S., Ticozzell, B., ve Schindler, A. (2020). Assessment of children's communicative participation: a preliminary study on the validity and reliability of the Italian Focus on
the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS-I) in preschool age. Speech, Language and Hearing, 23(3), 167-179.
Shepherd, J., Brollier, C. B., ve Dandrow, R. L. (1994). Play skills of preschool children with speech and language delays. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 14(2), 1-20.
Thomas‐Stonell, N. L., Oddson, B., Robertson, B., ve Rosenbaum, P. L. (2010). Development of the FOCUS (Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six), a communication outcome measure for preschool children. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 52(1), 47-53.
Thomas‐Stonell, N., Oddson, B., Robertson, B., ve Rosenbaum, P. (2012). The FOCUS©: Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six. Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto, ONT. Turkish FOCUS translated with permission by Şanlı Colay, N., Konrot, A. and Aydın, N, Üsküdar Üniversity.
Thomas‐Stonell, N., Oddson, B., Robertson, B., ve Rosenbaum, P. (2013). Validation of the FOCUS on the outcomes of communication under six outcome measure. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 55(6), 546-552.
Threats, T. T. (2010). The complexity of social/cultural dimension in communication disorders. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 62(4), 158-165.
Timler, G. R., Olswang, L. B., ve Coggins, T. E. (2005). "Do I know what I need to do?" A social communication intervention for children with complex clinical profiles. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(1):73-85.
Toğram, B., & Maviş, İ. (2012). Afazi Dil Değerlendirme Testi’nin geçerlik, güvenirlik ve standardizasyon çalışması. Türk Nöroloji Dergisi, 18(3), 96-103. doi: 10.4274/tnd.16779
Yorkston, K., Klasner, E., ve Swanson, K. (2001). Communication in context: A qualitative study of the experiences of individuals with multiple sclerosis. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10(2), 126-137. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2001/013)
Washington, K., Thomas‐Stonell, N., Oddson, B., McLeod, S., Warr‐Leeper, G., Robertson, B., ve Rosenbaum, P. (2013). Construct validity of the FOCUS (Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six): a communicative participation outcome measure for preschool children. Child: Care, Health and Development, 39(4), 481-489.
World Health Organization. (2001). World health report 2001: Mental health. World Health Organization.
World Health Organization. (2007). International classification of functioning, disability and health: Children and youth version: ICF-CY. World Health Organization.
World Health Organization. (2013). World health statistics 2013: A wealth of information on global public health. World Health Organization.