Linguistic style as a digital marker for depression severity: An ambulatory assessment pilot study in patients with depressive disorder undergoing sleep deprivation therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Digital phenotyping and monitoring tools are the most promising approaches to automatically detect upcoming depressive episodes. Especially, linguistic style has been seen as a potential behavioral marker of depression, as cross-sectional studies showed, for example, less frequent use of positive emotion words, intensified use of negative emotion words, and more self-references in patients with depression compared to healthy controls. However, longitudinal studies are sparse and therefore it remains unclear whether within-person fluctuations in depression severity are associated with individuals' linguistic style. METHODS: To capture affective states and concomitant speech samples longitudinally, we used an ambulatory assessment approach sampling multiple times a day via smartphones in patients diagnosed with depressive disorder undergoing sleep deprivation therapy. This intervention promises a rapid change of affective symptoms within a short period of time, assuring sufficient variability in depressive symptoms. We extracted word categories from the transcribed speech samples using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. RESULTS: Our analyses revealed that more pleasant affective momentary states (lower reported depression severity, lower negative affective state, higher positive affective state, (positive) valence, energetic arousal and calmness) are mirrored in the use of less negative emotion words and more positive emotion words. CONCLUSION: We conclude that a patient's linguistic style, especially the use of positive and negative emotion words, is associated with self-reported affective states and thus is a promising feature for speech-based automated monitoring and prediction of upcoming episodes, ultimately leading to better patient care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".