ArticleDigital health
Advanced comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms for early Parkinson's disease detection using vocal biomarkers.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Voice-Based Detection of Parkinson's Disease Using Machine and Deep Learning Approaches: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- An Explainable Ensemble and Deep Learning Framework for Accurate and Interpretable Parkinson's Disease Detection from Voice Biomarkers.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the potential of voice analysis-specifically sustained vowel phonation-as a non-invasive, cost-effective diagnostic method for early detection of Parkinson's disease (PD) using machine learning techniques. Methods: A publicly available dataset from the University of California, Irvine (UCI) repository, comprising 252 voice recordings (188 from PD patients and 64 from healthy individuals), was analyzed. Machine learning classifiers, including k-nearest neighbors (KNN), AdaBoost, and artificial neural networks (ANNs), were trained and tested on the dataset. Model evaluation was conducted using accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Kernel density estimation was applied to visualize and interpret classifier performance. Results: Among the classifiers, KNN demonstrated the best performance with an accuracy of 98.52% and a mean accuracy of 97.33%. ANN and AdaBoost achieved mean accuracies of 93.15% and 91.77%, respectively. All models performed well across standard evaluation metrics, indicating strong discriminative ability for detecting PD from voice data. Conclusion: The study confirms the feasibility of using sustained vowel phonation and machine learning for early PD diagnosis. The KNN classifier, in particular, shows excellent diagnostic accuracy. These findings support the integration of voice-based machine learning tools into clinical workflows, potentially enhancing early detection and management of PD.
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.