MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286705866 · doi:10.2196/39807

Using Voice Biomarkers to Classify Suicide Risk in Adult Telehealth Callers: Retrospective Observational Study

2022· article· en· W4286705866 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ravi Iyer, Maja Nedeljkovic, Denny Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTelehealthRisk assessmentPsychologyMedical emergencyComputer scienceTelemedicineHealth careComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence has the potential to innovate current practices used to detect the imminent risk of suicide and to address shortcomings in traditional assessment methods. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we sought to automatically classify short segments (40 milliseconds) of speech according to low versus imminent risk of suicide in a large number (n=281) of telephone calls made to 2 telehealth counselling services in Australia. METHODS: A total of 281 help line telephone call recordings sourced from On The Line, Australia (n=266, 94.7%) and 000 Emergency services, Canberra (n=15, 5.3%) were included in this study. Imminent risk of suicide was coded for when callers affirmed intent, plan, and the availability of means; level of risk was assessed by the responding counsellor and reassessed by a team of clinical researchers using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (=5/6). Low risk of suicide was coded for in an absence of intent, plan, and means and via Columbia suicide Severity Scale Ratings (=1/2). Preprocessing involved normalization and pre-emphasis of voice signals, while voice biometrics were extracted using the statistical language r. Candidate predictors were identified using Lasso regression. Each voice biomarker was assessed as a predictor of suicide risk using a generalized additive mixed effects model with splines to account for nonlinearity. Finally, a component-wise gradient boosting model was used to classify each call recording based on precoded suicide risk ratings. RESULTS: A total of 77 imminent-risk calls were compared with 204 low-risk calls. Moreover, 36 voice biomarkers were extracted from each speech frame. Caller sex was a significant moderating factor (β=-.84, 95% CI -0.85, -0.84; t=6.59, P<.001). Candidate biomarkers were reduced to 11 primary markers, with distinct models developed for men and women. Using leave-one-out cross-validation, ensuring that the speech frames of no single caller featured in both training and test data sets simultaneously, an area under the precision or recall curve of 0.985 was achieved (95% CI 0.97, 1.0). The gamboost classification model correctly classified 469,332/470,032 (99.85%) speech frames. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an objective, efficient, and economical assessment of imminent suicide risk in an ecologically valid setting with potential applications to real-time assessment and response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622000486729; https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12622000486729.aspx.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207