Automated speech analytics in ALS: higher sensitivity of digital articulatory precision over the ALSFRS-R.

Gabriela Stegmann, Chelsea Krantsevich, Julie Liss, Sherman Charles, Meredith Bartlett, Jeremy Shefner, Seward Rutkove, Kan Kawabata, Tanya Talkar, Visar Berisha
{"title":"Automated speech analytics in ALS: higher sensitivity of digital articulatory precision over the ALSFRS-R.","authors":"Gabriela Stegmann, Chelsea Krantsevich, Julie Liss, Sherman Charles, Meredith Bartlett, Jeremy Shefner, Seward Rutkove, Kan Kawabata, Tanya Talkar, Visar Berisha","doi":"10.1080/21678421.2024.2371986","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Objective</i>: Although studies have shown that digital measures of speech detected ALS speech impairment and correlated with the ALSFRS-R speech item, no study has yet compared their performance in detecting speech changes. In this study, we compared the performances of the ALSFRS-R speech item and an algorithmic speech measure in detecting clinically important changes in speech. Importantly, the study was part of a FDA submission which received the breakthrough device designation for monitoring ALS; we provide this paper as a roadmap for validating other speech measures for monitoring disease progression. <i>Methods</i>: We obtained ALSFRS-R speech subscores and speech samples from participants with ALS. We computed the minimum detectable change (MDC) of both measures; using clinician-reported listener effort and a perceptual ratings of severity, we calculated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of each measure with respect to both sets of clinical ratings. <i>Results</i>: For articulatory precision, the MDC (.85) was lower than both MCID measures (2.74 and 2.28), and for the ALSFRS-R speech item, MDC (.86) was greater than both MCID measures (.82 and .72), indicating that while the articulatory precision measure detected minimal clinically important differences in speech, the ALSFRS-R speech item did not. <i>Conclusion</i>: The results demonstrate that the digital measure of articulatory precision effectively detects clinically important differences in speech ratings, outperforming the ALSFRS-R speech item. Taken together, the results herein suggest that this speech outcome is a clinically meaningful measure of speech change.</p>","PeriodicalId":72184,"journal":{"name":"Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration","volume":" ","pages":"767-775"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496019/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21678421.2024.2371986","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Although studies have shown that digital measures of speech detected ALS speech impairment and correlated with the ALSFRS-R speech item, no study has yet compared their performance in detecting speech changes. In this study, we compared the performances of the ALSFRS-R speech item and an algorithmic speech measure in detecting clinically important changes in speech. Importantly, the study was part of a FDA submission which received the breakthrough device designation for monitoring ALS; we provide this paper as a roadmap for validating other speech measures for monitoring disease progression. Methods: We obtained ALSFRS-R speech subscores and speech samples from participants with ALS. We computed the minimum detectable change (MDC) of both measures; using clinician-reported listener effort and a perceptual ratings of severity, we calculated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of each measure with respect to both sets of clinical ratings. Results: For articulatory precision, the MDC (.85) was lower than both MCID measures (2.74 and 2.28), and for the ALSFRS-R speech item, MDC (.86) was greater than both MCID measures (.82 and .72), indicating that while the articulatory precision measure detected minimal clinically important differences in speech, the ALSFRS-R speech item did not. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that the digital measure of articulatory precision effectively detects clinically important differences in speech ratings, outperforming the ALSFRS-R speech item. Taken together, the results herein suggest that this speech outcome is a clinically meaningful measure of speech change.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ALS 的自动语音分析:数字发音精确度比 ALSFRS-R 灵敏度更高。
研究目的虽然有研究表明,数字语音测量方法可以检测到 ALS 言语障碍,并与 ALSFRS-R 言语项目相关,但还没有研究比较过它们在检测言语变化方面的性能。在本研究中,我们比较了 ALSFRS-R 言语项目和算法语音测量在检测临床上重要的言语变化方面的性能。重要的是,该研究是美国食品药品管理局(FDA)提交的研究报告的一部分,该报告获得了用于监测 ALS 的突破性设备称号;我们将本文作为验证用于监测疾病进展的其他语音测量方法的路线图。方法:我们从 ALS 患者那里获得了 ALSFRS-R 言语子分数和言语样本。我们计算了这两项测量的最小可检测变化 (MDC);利用临床医生报告的听者努力程度和对严重程度的感知评分,我们计算了每项测量相对于两组临床评分的最小临床重要差异 (MCID)。结果显示就发音精确度而言,MDC(.85)低于两个 MCID 测量值(2.74 和 2.28),而就 ALSFRS-R 言语项目而言,MDC(.86)高于两个 MCID 测量值(.82 和 .72),这表明发音精确度测量值能检测出言语中最小临床重要差异,而 ALSFRS-R 言语项目则不能。结论结果表明,数字发音精确度测量方法能有效检测出言语评分中的临床重要差异,其效果优于 ALSFRS-R 言语项目。总之,本文的结果表明,这种语音结果是一种对语音变化有临床意义的测量方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Estimating the minimum important difference in the ALSFRS-R-instrument in people living with MND. Quantitative susceptibility mapping in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: automatic quantification of the magnetic susceptibility in the subcortical nuclei. Treatment continuity of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with available riluzole formulations: state of the art and current challenges in a 'real-world' setting. Occupational lead exposure and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis survival in the Danish National Patient Registry. Jean Marie Baptiste Vianney de Jong (1937-2024).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1