Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38963790›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2024

Automatic Speech Recognition of Conversational Speech in Individuals With Disordered Speech.

Jimmy Tobin, Phillip Nelson, Bob MacDonald, Rus Heywood, Richard Cave, Katie Seaver, Antoine Desjardins, Pan-Pan Jiang, Jordan R Green

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Artificial Intelligence in Communication Sciences and Disorders: Introduction to the Forum.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jimmy TobinGoogle LLC, Mountain View, CA.ORCID 0009-0009-5733-9295
Phillip NelsonGoogle LLC, Mountain View, CA.
Bob MacDonaldGoogle LLC, Mountain View, CA.ORCID 0000-0001-9935-6055
Rus HeywoodGoogle LLC, Mountain View, CA.
Richard CaveMND Association, Northampton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6410-8200
Katie SeaverMGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-8537-9296
Antoine DesjardinsMGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-1361-9350
Pan-Pan JiangGoogle LLC, Mountain View, CA.
Jordan R GreenMGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-1464-1373

Funding

Prolonging Functional Speech in Persons with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Real-Time Virtual Vocal TractK24DC016312 · NIDCD · MGH INSTITUTE OF HEALTH PROFESSIONS · PI GREEN, JORDAN R · 2017 to 2021
$949k
Research Symposium in Communication Sciences and DisordersR13DC003383 · NIDCD · AMERICAN SPEECH-LANGUAGE-HEARING ASSN · PI MARGARET A. ROGERS · 1997 to 2026
$727k
NIDCD NIH HHS K24 DC016312NIDCD NIH HHS R13 DC003383
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study examines the effectiveness of automatic speech recognition (ASR) for individuals with speech disorders, addressing the gap in performance between read and conversational ASR. We analyze the factors influencing this disparity and the effect of speech mode-specific training on ASR accuracy.

methodRecordings of read and conversational speech from 27 individuals with various speech disorders were analyzed using both (a) one speaker-independent ASR system trained and optimized for typical speech and (b) multiple ASR models that were personalized to the speech of the participants with disordered speech. Word error rates were calculated for each speech model, read versus conversational, and subject. Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the impact of speech mode and disorder severity on ASR accuracy. We investigated nine variables, classified as technical, linguistic, or speech impairment factors, for their potential influence on the performance gap.

resultsWe found a significant performance gap between read and conversational speech in both personalized and unadapted ASR models. Speech impairment severity notably impacted recognition accuracy in unadapted models for both speech modes and in personalized models for read speech. Linguistic attributes of utterances were the most influential on accuracy, though atypical speech characteristics also played a role. Including conversational speech samples in model training notably improved recognition accuracy.

conclusionsWe observed a significant performance gap in ASR accuracy between read and conversational speech for individuals with speech disorders. This gap was largely due to the linguistic complexity and unique characteristics of speech disorders in conversational speech. Training personalized ASR models using conversational speech significantly improved recognition accuracy, demonstrating the importance of domain-specific training and highlighting the need for further research into ASR systems capable of handling disordered conversational speech effectively.

Indexed as

SpeechSpeech DisordersSpeech Recognition SoftwareAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReadingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38963790
PMCPMC12379580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.