ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Multimodal machine learning for language and speech markers identification in mental health.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Humanizing "multimodal" digital phenotyping of serious mental illness.Journal of psychopathology and clinical science · 2026Article
- NSX-Net: A Neurolinguistic and Acoustic Multimodal Deep Learning Framework for Speech Disorder Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Machine learning and natural language processing for the identification of potential mental disorders among school-age children: a prospective birth cohort study.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- A multilevel meta-analysis of passive smartphone sensing of adolescent mental health.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A Scoping Review of AI-Based Approaches for Detecting Autism Traits Using Voice and Behavioral Data.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Integration of Multi-Modal Biosensing Approaches for Depression: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are numerous papers focusing on diagnosing mental health disorders using unimodal and multimodal approaches. However, our literature review shows that the majority of these studies either use unimodal approaches to diagnose a variety of mental disorders or employ multimodal approaches to diagnose a single mental disorder instead. In this research we combine these approaches by first identifying and compiling an extensive list of mental health disorder markers for a wide range of mental illnesses which have been used for both unimodal and multimodal methods, which is subsequently used for determining whether the multimodal approach can outperform the unimodal approaches.
methodsFor this study we used the well known and robust multimodal DAIC-WOZ dataset derived from clinical interviews. Here we focus on the modalities text and audio. First, we constructed two unimodal models to analyze text and audio data, respectively, using feature extraction, based on the extensive list of mental disorder markers that has been identified and compiled by us using related and earlier studies. For our unimodal text model, we also propose an initial pragmatic binary label creation process. Then, we employed an early fusion strategy to combine our text and audio features before model processing. Our fused feature set was then given as input to various baseline machine and deep learning algorithms, including Support Vector Machines, Logistic Regressions, Random Forests, and fully connected neural network classifiers (Dense Layers). Ultimately, the performance of our models was evaluated using accuracy, AUC-ROC score, and two F1 metrics: one for the prediction of positive cases and one for the prediction of negative cases.
resultsOverall, the unimodal text models achieved an accuracy ranging from 78% to 87% and an AUC-ROC score between 85% and 93%, while the unimodal audio models attained an accuracy of 64% to 72% and AUC-ROC scores of 53% to 75%. The experimental results indicated that our multimodal models achieved comparable accuracy (ranging from 80% to 87%) and AUC-ROC scores (between 84% and 93%) to those of the unimodal text models. However, the majority of the multimodal models managed to outperform the unimodal models in F1 scores, particularly in the F1 score of the positive class (F1 of 1s), which reflects how well the models perform in identifying the presence of a marker.
conclusionsIn conclusion, by refining the binary label creation process and by improving the feature engineering process of the unimodal acoustic model, we argue that the multimodal model can outperform both unimodal approaches. This study underscores the importance of multimodal integration in the field of mental health diagnostics and sets the stage for future research to explore more sophisticated fusion techniques and deeper learning models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.