What do people with aphasia want from the Queen Square Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programme and do they achieve it? A quantitative and qualitative analysis of their short, medium, long-term and economic goals

Background: The most effective model for achieving therapist-delivered, high-dose SLT for People with Aphasia (PWA) is through Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes (ICAPs). ICAPs are often assessed using standardised outcome measures; however, as SLT is personalised, it is of interest to examine individualised goal-based outcome measures as well. In the Queen Square ICAP, we use a goal-setting approach (Goal Attainment Setting [GAS]) where the PWA and their therapist negotiate which goals to work on and over what timescales. This process involves recording and scoring the agreed goals, which makes them amenable to formal quantitative and qualitative analysis. Aims: The aim of this study was twofold. Firstly, to test the hypothesis that a pre- versus post- ICAP analysis of individual’s goal scores would show statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements. Secondly, to better understand what PWA wanted to achieve from the ICAP service, we performed a qualitative analysis across all agreed goals. Methods & Procedures: Forty-four PWA who varied in aphasia severity from mild to severe took part. PWA jointly set goals with their therapists using the SMART framework (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound). The goals were split into four categories: short (3 weeks), medium (3-6 months), long-term (12 months) and economic, (defined as any outcome that will improve, either directly or indirectly, the economic system that the PWA lives within). Quantitative scores were obtained for each PWA both pre- and post- ICAP and were analysed using paired t-tests, with subsequent ANOVAs to investigate possible confounding factors. The qualitative analysis was carried out by two researchers not involved in delivering the ICAP. Data was collapsed across all goal categories and analysed using thematic analysis. Outcomes & Results: Quantitatively, statistically significant gains were made across all four goal categories (ps < 0.001). Unstandardized effect-sizes were clinically significant (ΔGAS ~16). Qualitatively, we identified five main themes: staying connected with the world, understanding aphasia better, raising awareness, the importance of having a work identity and managing personal relationships. Conclusions: Quantitative goal-setting for PWA in the context of an ICAP provides robust evidence that PWA can achieve a variety of aspirational goals given high enough doses of specialist input from SLTs and a clinical psychologist. Although the ICAP only spanned 3 weeks, PWA continued to reach medium, long-term and even economic goals up to a year post-recruitment. This is the first time that economic goals have been captured in PWA using GAS. The qualitative analysis describes what the PWA wanted to achieve from participating in our ICAP, while the quantitative analyses demonstrate how much they succeeded in doing so

Update to Our Reader, Reviewer, and Author Communities—April 2020

The research community faces unprecedented disruption from the global COVID-19 pandemic. Some researchers are beginning to return to lab work after a hiatus, but others continue to work as best as they can from home, including ourselves. The global editorial, support, and production staff of ACS journals continue to work as usual, even though most are working from locations that are not their usual work environment.Throughout this period, we seek to assist our authors, reviewers, and readers, despite the exceptional disruption to their normal research workflow. One area of particular concern is that authors may require extra time to prepare revised manuscripts, especially if additional laboratory-based experimental work is required to address specific reviewer or editor concerns. At this time, reviewers may consider limiting their recommendations for additional experimental work, except in those cases where they deem it necessary to support the central claims of the paper and maintain high standards of science/engineering. Please let us know if you require extra time to complete a revision of your manuscript as we are happy to work with you to determine an appropriate course of action. Should authors or reviewers have questions or concerns during this period regarding the need for additional time for a review or revision, please do not hesitate to contact the editorial office responsible for the manuscript and/or the editor-in-chief.ACS Publications has a resource page for readers, authors and reviewers and it can be accessed here.The editors and staff at our journals wish our community the best as it faces multiple challenges arising from the pandemic. Among those most impacted are young scientists and other early career members of the community, and we hope everyone does their best to support one another, especially those most affected by the disruption, and that, globally, we observe a quick resolution to the situation.This joint Editorial was simultaneously published in other American Chemical Society journals

Confronting Racism in Chemistry Journals

We confront the terrible reality that systemic racism and discrimination impacts the daily personal and professional lives of many members of the scientific community and broader society. In the U.S., the brutal killing of George Floyd while in police custody is one of the most recent examples of the centuries of systemic violence suffered by Black Americans. This moment and its aftermath lay bare the legacies of racism and its exclusionary practices. Let us be clear: we, the Editors, Staff, and Governance Members of ACS Publications condemn the tragic deaths of Black people and stand in solidarity with Black members of the science and engineering community. Moreover, ACS condemns racism, discrimination, and harassment in all forms. We will not tolerate practices and viewpoints that exclude or demean any member of our community. Despite these good intentions, we recognize that our community has not done enough to provide an environment for Black chemists to thrive. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman of the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology said, "So far, we have gotten by with a STEM workforce that does not come close to representing the diversity of our nation. However, if we continue to leave behind so much of our nation's brainpower, we cannot succeed." 1 Indeed, the U.S. National Science Foundation notes that Blacks and other under-represented minority groups continue to be under-represented in science and engineering education and employment. 2 What is abundantly clear in this moment is that this lack of representation is a symptom of systemic racism across all levels of education and professional life. We know that supportive words are not enough. We must develop and implement a concrete plan for changing our trajectory. Publications and citations are academic currency, and while we like to think publishing a manuscript is "just about the science", we know that is not true for everyone. We have seen the biases (largely through the lens of gender and in Western countries because of the limitations in bibliometric analyses) and applaud our colleagues at the RSC for their massive study that explored these gender barriers in the publishing pipeline 3 and their recent Inclusion and Diversity Framework. 4 At the present time, unfortunately, less is known about the effects of race and ethnicity on publishing success. A study published in PeerJ, however, found that unprofessional reviewer comments had a disproportionate effect on authors from under-represented groups. 5 As the world's leading society publisher, we have a responsibility to aggressively combat bias in all aspects of the publishing process, including systemic under-representation of Blacks in this endeavor (no ACS journal is currently led by a Black Editor-in-Chief). Within ACS Publications, we actively track gender and geographic diversity of editors, advisors, authors, and reviewers, and we anecdotally report on race of editors. Diversity encompasses many more dimensions than these, and we acknowledge that we can do much more than we have. We affirm that diversity and inclusion strengthen the research community and its impact, and we are committed to developing, implementing, tracking, and reporting on our progress to ensure that our editors, advisors, reviewers, and authors are more diverse and that all authors receive the same fair treatment and opportunity to publish in our journals. We acknowledge that we do not have all the answers now, but we seek to hear from and listen to our community on how we can improve our journals to be more diverse and inclusive. As first steps, we commit to the taking the following actions: • Gathering and making public our baseline statistics on diversity within our journals, encompassing our editors, advisors, reviewers, and authors; annually reporting on progress • Training new and existing editors to recognize and interrupt bias in peer review • Including diversity of journal contributors as an explicit measurement of Editor-in-Chief performance • Appointing an ombudsperson to serve as a liaison between Editors and our Community • Developing an actionable diversity plan for each ACS journal These are only initial plans and the start of a conversation: other ideas are beginning to germinate, and we commit to sharing them with you regularly. We invite you contribute your ideas on how we can do better via our Axial website. We are listening carefully. We encourage you to take immediate action in your own circles. In a recent editorial, JACS Associate Editor Melanie Sanford 6 offered practical steps to take now. Take a moment to find out more about these actions and how to bring them into your work and your life. We all have a responsibility to eradicate racism and discrimination in the science and engineering community; indeed, to make a real difference, we need to be antiracist. The tragic events we have seen in the Black community provide great urgency to this goal. The work will be difficult and will force us to confront hard realities about our beliefs and actions. We fully expect that you, and everyone in the community, will hold us accountable

The Human Affectome

Over the last decades, the interdisciplinary field of the affective sciences has seen proliferation rather than integration of theoretical perspectives. This is due to differences in metaphysical and mechanistic assumptions about human affective phenomena (what they are and how they work) which, shaped by academic motivations and values, have determined the affective constructs and operationalizations. An assumption on the purpose of affective phenomena can be used as a teleological principle to guide the construction of a common set of metaphysical and mechanistic assumptions—a framework for human affective research. In this capstone paper for the special issue “Towards an Integrated Understanding of the Human Affectome”, we gather the tiered purpose of human affective phenomena to synthesize assumptions that account for human affective phenomena collectively. This teleologically-grounded framework offers a principled agenda and launchpad for both organizing existing perspectives and generating new ones. Ultimately, we hope Human Affectome brings us a step closer to not only an integrated understanding of human affective phenomena, but an integrated field for affective research

The Human Affectome

Over the last decades, the interdisciplinary field of the affective sciences has seen proliferation rather than integration of theoretical perspectives. This is due to differences in metaphysical and mechanistic assumptions about human affective phenomena (what they are and how they work) which, shaped by academic motivations and values, have determined the affective constructs and operationalizations. An assumption on the purpose of affective phenomena can be used as a teleological principle to guide the construction of a common set of metaphysical and mechanistic assumptions-a framework for human affective research. In this capstone paper for the special issue "Towards an Integrated Understanding of the Human Affectome", we gather the tiered purpose of human affective phenomena to synthesize assumptions that account for human affective phenomena collectively. This teleologically-grounded framework offers a principled agenda and launchpad for both organizing existing perspectives and generating new ones. Ultimately, we hope Human Affectome brings us a step closer to not only an integrated understanding of human affective phenomena, but an integrated field for affective research