MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393282285 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082388

Longitudinal observational cohort study: Speech for Intelligent cognition change tracking and DEtection of Alzheimer’s Disease (SIDE-AD)

2024· article· en· W4393282285 on OpenAlexaff
Stina Saunders, Fasih Haider, Craig Ritchie, Graciela Muñiz‐Terrera, Saturnino Luz

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public HealthHeritage College
FundersUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyInformed consentMoodAnxietyDiseaseCognitionPhoneCohortPsychiatryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: There is emerging evidence that speech may be a potential indicator and manifestation of early Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. Therefore, the University of Edinburgh and Sony Research have partnered to create the Speech for Intelligent cognition change tracking and DEtection of Alzheimer's Disease (SIDE-AD) study, which aims to develop digital speech-based biomarkers for use in neurodegenerative disease. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: SIDE-AD is an observational longitudinal study, collecting samples of spontaneous speech. Participants are recruited from existing cohort studies as well as from the National Health Service (NHS)memory clinics in Scotland. Using an online platform, participants record a voice sample talking about their brain health and rate their mood, anxiety and apathy. The speech biomarkers will be analysed longitudinally, and we will use machine learning and natural language processing technology to automate the assessment of the respondents' speech patterns. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The SIDE-AD study has been approved by the NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 23/WM/0153, protocol number AC23046, IRAS Project ID 323311) and received NHS management approvals from Lothian, Fife and Forth Valley NHS boards. Our main ethical considerations pertain to the remote administration of the study, such as taking remote consent. To address this, we implemented a consent process, whereby the first step of the consent is done entirely remotely but a member of the research team contacts the participant over the phone to consent participants to the optional, most sensitive, elements of the study. Results will be presented at conferences, published in peer-reviewed journals and communicated to study participants.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.340
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.143 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→