Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (MAST)
A brief screen that detects aphasia in 5 to 10 minutes.
By Claire White
- Clinician-administered; approximately 5 to 10 minutes.
- 9 sub-scales covering naming, repetition, automatic speech, following commands, yes/no responses, and writing.
- An Expressive Index from 0 to 50 and a Receptive Index from 0 to 50, summing to a total from 0 to 100.
Psychometrics
From the Estonian adaptation's ROC analysis against healthy controls. Higher is better.
What does the MAST measure?
The MAST screens expressive and receptive language with nine short subtests, including naming, repetition, yes/no responses, following instructions, and writing. Subtests 1 to 3 and 8 to 9 sum to an Expressive Index from 0 to 50, subtests 4 to 7 sum to a Receptive Index from 0 to 50, and all nine sum to a total from 0 to 100. It gives a quick indication of aphasia and its severity. It is a screen, not a full battery.
What does a MAST score mean?
Lower is more impaired. The English original reported criterion validity without proposing a threshold, and the literature publishes no agreed severity bands for the MAST. What it does publish is a cut-off for the total, from two adaptations.
| Adaptation | Total suggesting aphasia | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Estonian (Nursi et al., 2019) | 88 or below | Derived by ROC. Sensitivity 89%, specificity 80%. |
| Spanish (Romero et al., 2012) | Below 90 | Proposed as a diagnostic cut-off in stroke patients. |
A reduced total is read alongside the split between the two indices, which shows whether the difficulty sits in producing language or in understanding it. The result is reference information, and a positive screen typically leads to a fuller battery such as the WAB-R.
How the MAST is administered
- Administered by
- A clinician. Validated on neurology, neurosurgery, and rehabilitation inpatients.
- Time to administer
- 5 to 10 minutes
- Cost
- Free to take here.
- Published by
- Methodist Rehabilitation Center
- Age range
- Adults
- Available languages
- English, with validated Estonian, Spanish, and Persian adaptations
Which conditions is the MAST used for?
Related instruments
- Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST)The other short bedside aphasia screen, with published age-adjusted cut-offs
- Western Aphasia Battery (WAB-R)The full battery a positive screen usually leads to
- Frenchay Dysarthria Assessment (FDA-2)For when speech is slurred rather than the words being lost
- Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI)Everyday communication, rated by a family member
MAST questions, answered
How is the MAST scored?
Nine short subtests produce an Expressive Index from 0 to 50 and a Receptive Index from 0 to 50, which sum to a total from 0 to 100. Lower scores mean more impairment.
What does a score like 72 out of 100 mean?
The MAST does not carry official severity bands. A reduced total flags likely aphasia, and the split between the Expressive and Receptive indices shows where the difficulty lies, in producing language or in understanding it. A low screen result points toward a full battery such as the Western Aphasia Battery, which is built for grading severity.
How long does the MAST take?
About five to ten minutes.
What is the difference between the MAST and a full aphasia battery?
The MAST is a screen. It flags whether aphasia is likely and roughly how severe it is, quickly enough for a bedside visit. A full battery such as the WAB-R profiles the type of aphasia and grades severity precisely, and takes the better part of an hour.
Is the MAST available in other languages?
Validated adaptations exist. The Estonian version reports sensitivity of 89 percent and specificity of 80 percent, the Spanish version proposes a cut-off below 90 on the total, and the Persian version reports test-retest reliability of 0.96.
Evidence, psychometrics and provenance
Created by Nakase-Thompson and colleagues at the Methodist Rehabilitation Center, and validated in 2005. The original English validation reported criterion validity but no reliability coefficients; later adaptations supply those.
- Internal consistency
- α 0.94 for the total in the Estonian aphasia group (Nursi et al., 2019)
- Test-retest reliability
- ICC 0.96 for the total in the Persian adaptation (Khatoonabadi et al., 2015)
- Criterion validity
- Left-hemisphere stroke patients score below controls
References
- 1.Nakase-Thompson R, Manning E, Sherer M, Yablon SA, Gontkovsky SL, Vickery C. Brief assessment of severe language impairments: initial validation of the Mississippi aphasia screening test. Brain Inj. 2005;19(9):685-691.
- 2.Nursi A, Padrik M, Nursi L, et al. Adaption and validation of the Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test to Estonian speakers with aphasia. Brain Behav. 2019;9(1):e01188.
- 3.Romero M, Sánchez A, Marín C, Navarro MD, Ferri J, Noé E. Clinical usefulness of the Spanish version of the Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (MASTsp): validation in stroke patients. Neurologia. 2012;27(4):216-224.
- 4.Khatoonabadi AR, Nakhostin-Ansari N, Piran A, Tahmasian H. Development, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Persian Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test in patients with post-stroke aphasia. Iran J Neurol. 2015;14(2):101-107.
This assessment uses a validated instrument and is reference information, not a diagnosis.