Introduction à la rééducation neuropsychologique

The course presents cognitive treatments for alterations of the attentional system, working memory, reading, episodic memory and the executive system. The treatments presented come from scientific studies and are adapted for acquired disorders resulting from brain damage in adults. An in-depth analysis of these studies is proposed in order to bring out the guidelines of the cognitive approach in cognitive rehabilitation. A chapter of the course is devoted specifically to these guidelines in order to present a scientific methodological framework underlying the development of cognitive treatments.

The main objective of the course is to provide the methodological, technical and conceptual tools leading to the development of therapies aimed at improving the functioning of the adult person whose one or more cognitive functions is/are altered following brain damage. At the end of this teaching unit, a student will have to be able to set a therapeutic objective in cognitive terms, propose a therapy allowing this objective to be achieved and an experimental design allowing to evaluate the effectiveness of the therapy in a person.

Required and Corequired knowledge and skills

- Knowledge of models of normal cognitive functioning in the areas of the attentional system, working memory, reading, episodic memory, and the executive system (because targeted by the therapies presented within the framework of the course) and also in the fields of visual identification of objects and processing components whose therapies have not been presented within the framework of the course but which are part of cognitive functions for which therapies have been presented during the course. Students are expected to know the functions of the various processing components that appear in the functional architectures present in the course and the tasks to assess their functionning. Indeed, some questions on the exam dealing with the application of knowledge to practical situations may relate to any of these components.

- Knowledge of the tasks allowing the evaluation of the processing components involved in these different models.

Cours ayant celui-ci comme co-requis

Lecture

References, bibliography, and recommended reading

Seron, X. & Van der Linden M. (2016) "Traité de Neuropsychologie Clinique - Tome 2 - Revalidation" Editions Deboeck

Course notes

• Podcast
• Université virtuelle

Contacts

patrick.fery@ulb.be

02/5555424 (not on mondays; only before 9 a.m.)

Campus

Erasme

Method(s) of evaluation

• written examination
• Other

written examination

• Question with negative count
• Closed question with multiple choices (MCQ)
• Closed question with Multiple Answers (MAQ)

Other

Written exam :

1. questions relating directly to the content of the course: these questions make it possible to check the acquisition of theoretical knowledge

2. questions requiring the application of theoretical knowledge to concrete situations of revalidation (see required knowledge and skills section)

To avoid ambiguity about the type of question, each question may have one or more correct answers among the alternatives provided. The number of correct answers for each question is not specified.

Mark calculation method (including weighting of intermediary marks)

The number of points allocated per question varies from question to question (generally questions are attributed 1 or 2 points).

Correct alternatives: For each correct alternative selected, the total number of points for the question divided by the number of correct alternatives is awarded (for example, if 1 point is awarded for completely passing the question and there are 2 correct alternatives, 0.5 points are awarded per correct alternative selected). Failure to select a correct alternative results in the award of 0 points.

Incorrect alternatives: Selecting an incorrect alternative is given a negative weight; its absolute value is always lower than that of the weight linked to the correct alternatives; it is the total number of points for the question divided by the number of incorrect alternatives, all multiplied by 2/3 (for example, if 2 points are awarded for completely passing the question and that there are 4 incorrect alternatives: (2/4)*2/3 = 0.33; therefore the choice of an incorrect alternative entails a weighting equal to -0.33).

The final score is the total number of negative and positive points obtained for each question.

Language(s) of evaluation

• french