ArticleDiscover mental health2025
Voice analysis and deep learning for detecting mental disorders in pregnant women: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Discover mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionPerinatal mental disorders are prevalent, affecting 10-20% of pregnant women, and can negatively impact both maternal and neonatal outcomes. Traditional screening tools, such as the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), present limitations due to subjectivity and time constraints in clinical settings. Recent advances in voice analysis and machine learning have shown potential for providing more objective screening methods. This study aimed to develop a deep learning model that analyzes the voices of pregnant women to screen for mental disorders, thereby offering an alternative to the traditional tools.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 204 pregnant women, from whom voice samples were collected during their one-month postpartum checkup. The audio data were preprocessed into 5000 ms intervals, converted into mel-spectrograms, and augmented using TrivialAugment and context-rich minority oversampling. The EfficientFormer V2-L model, pretrained on ImageNet, was employed with transfer learning for classification. The hyperparameters were optimized using Optuna, and an ensemble learning approach was used for the final predictions. The model's performance was compared to that of the EPDS in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and other diagnostic metrics.
resultsOf the 172 participants analyzed (149 without mental disorders and 23 with mental disorders), the voice-based model demonstrated a sensitivity of 1.00 and a recall of 0.82, outperforming the EPDS in these areas. However, the EPDS exhibited higher specificity (0.97) and precision (0.84). No significant difference was observed in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between the two methods (p = 0.759). DISCUSSION: The voice-based model showed higher sensitivity and recall, suggesting that it may be more effective in identifying at-risk individuals than the EPDS. Machine learning and voice analysis are promising objective screening methods for mental disorders during pregnancy, potentially improving early detection.
conclusionWe developed a lightweight machine learning model to analyze pregnant women's voices for screening various mental disorders, achieving high sensitivity and demonstrating the potential of voice analysis as an effective and objective tool in perinatal mental health care.
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.