MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387721637 · doi:10.1016/j.mcpdig.2023.08.005

Acoustic Analysis and Prediction of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using Smartphone-Recorded Voice Segments

2023· article· en· W4387721637 on OpenAlex
Jaycee Kaufman, Anirudh Thommandram, Yan Fossat

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMayo Clinic Proceedings Digital Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexType 2 Diabetes MellitusAudiologyDiabetes mellitusSample entropyInternal medicineMathematicsStatisticsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the potential of voice analysis as a prescreening or monitoring tool for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) by examining the differences in voice recordings between nondiabetic and T2DM individuals. Total 267 participants diagnosed as nondiabetic (79 women and 113 men) or T2DM (18 women and 57 men) on the basis of American Diabetes Association guidelines were recruited in India between August 30, 2021 and June 30, 2022. Using a smartphone application, participants recorded a fixed phrase up to 6 times daily for 2 weeks, resulting in 18,465 recordings. Fourteen acoustic features were extracted from each recording to analyze differences between nondiabetic and T2DM individuals and create a prediction methodology for T2DM status. Significant differences were found between voice recordings of nondiabetic and T2DM men and women, both in the entire dataset and in an age-matched and body mass index (BMI [calculated as the weight in kilograms divided by the height in meters squared])-matched sample. The highest predictive accuracy was achieved by pitch (P<.0001), pitch SD (P<.0001), and relative average pertubation jitter (P=.02) for women, and intensity (P<.0001) and 11-point amplitude perturbation quotient shimmer (apq11, P<0.0001) for men. Incorporating these features with age and BMI, the optimal prediction models achieved accuracies of 0.75±0.22 for women and 0.70±0.10 for men through 5-fold cross-validation in the age-matched and BMI-matched sample. Overall, vocal changes occur in individuals with T2DM compared with those without T2DM. Voice analysis shows potential as a prescreening or monitoring tool for T2DM, particularly when combined with other risk factors associated with the condition. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: CTRI/2021/08/035957

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.291 · 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