Vocal markers of schizophrenia: assessing the generalizability of machine learning models and their clinical applicability
Parola, A.; Trenckner Jessen, E.; Rybner, A.; Damsgaard Mortensen, M.; Nyhus Larsen, S.; Simonsen, A.; Lin, J. M.; Zhou, Y.; Huiling, W.; Koelkebeck, K.; Sechidis, K.; Bliksted, V.; Fusaroli, R.
Show abstract
Background and HypothesisMachine Learning (ML) models have been argued to reliably predict diagnosis and symptoms of schizophrenia based on voice data only. However, it is unclear to what extent such ML markers would generalize to different clinical samples and different languages, a crucial assessment to move towards clinical applicability. In this study, we systematically assessed the generalizability of ML models of vocal markers of schizophrenia across contexts and languages. Study DesignWe trained models relying on a large cross-linguistic dataset (Danish, German, Chinese) of 217 patients with schizophrenia and 221 controls, and used a conservative pipeline to minimize overfitting. We tested the models generalizability on: (i) new participants, speaking the same language; (ii) new participants, speaking a different language; (iii) further, we assessed whether training on data with multiple languages would improve generalizability using Mixture of Expert (MoE) and multilingual models. ResultsModel performance was comparable to state-of-the-art findings (F1-score [~] 0.75) within the same language; however, models did not generalize well - showing a substantial decrease - when tested on new languages. The performance of MoE and multilingual models was also generally low (F1-score [~] 0.50). ConclusionsOverall, the cross-linguistic generalizability of vocal markers of schizophrenia is limited. We argue that more emphasis should be placed on collecting large open cross- linguistic datasets to systematically test the generalizability of voice-based ML models, and on identifying more precise mechanisms of how the clinical features of schizophrenia are expressed in language and voice, and how different languages vary in that expression.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Who Does What to Whom? Graph Representations of Action-Predication in Speech Relate to Psychopathological Dimensions of Psychosis 93%
- Progressive changes in descriptive discourse in First Episode of Schizophrenia: A longitudinal computational semantics study 91%
- Heterogeneity of morphometric similarity networks in health and schizophrenia 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Deep Multimodal Representations and Classification of First-Episode Psychosis via Live Face Processing 93%
- Understanding Psychiatric Illness Through Natural Language Processing (UNDERPIN): Rationale, Design, and Methodology 93%
- Machine Learning Models Predict the Emergence of Depression in Argentinean College Students during Periods of COVID-19 Quarantine 91%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- A single composite index of semantic behavior tracks symptoms of psychosis over time 95%
- Speech disturbances in schizophrenia: assessing cross-linguistic generalizability of NLP automated measures of coherence 95%
- Influence of E/I balance and pruning in peri-personal space differences in schizophrenia: a computational approach 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Identifying medications underlying communication atypicalities in psychotic and affective disorders: A pharmacovigilance study within the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System 92%
- Automating intended target identification for paraphasias in discourse using a large language model 92%
- Acoustic Measures of Prosody in Right-Hemisphere Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 91%
"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.