ArticleJAMIA open2025
Benchmarking speech-to-text robustness in noisy emergency medical dialogues: an evaluation of models under realistic acoustic conditions.
Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Speech Analytics-Based Methodological Protocol for Monitoring Orthopedic Rehabilitation in the Brazilian Unified Health System.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Empowered "Walking Hospitals": A Narrative Review of Innovative Models and Ecosystem Construction in Rural Healthcare.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
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
Objectives: To evaluate the transcription accuracy of 6 German-capable speech-to-text (STT) systems in simulated emergency medical services (EMS) environments, focusing on clinically relevant performance under noisy and multilingual field conditions. Materials and Methods: We generated a corpus of 99 synthetic emergency dialogues and overlaid them with ecologically valid noise types-crowd chatter, traffic, public spaces, and ambulance interiors-at 5 signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), producing 1980 noisy audio samples. Each was transcribed by 6 STT systems (recapp, Vosk, Whisper v3 variants, and RescueSpeech). We assessed performance using 5 metrics: Word Error Rate (WER), Medical Word Error Rate (mWER), TF-IDF Cosine Similarity, BLEU, and semantic embedding similarity. Statistical models quantified the effects of system, noise, and SNR on transcription fidelity. Results: recapp consistently outperformed all other systems across metrics. Among open-source models, Whisper v3 Turbo achieved the lowest mWER and strongest phrase-level accuracy (BLEU), while Whisper v3 Large preserved semantic content best. RescueSpeech and Vosk underperformed. "Inside crowded" noise had the most degrading impact on performance, while "talking" noise had minimal effect. Performance degradation was most pronounced at the lowest SNR (-2 dB). Discussion: STT model accuracy is highly sensitive to acoustic conditions. Clinically salient transcription errors (mWER) were most frequent under dense environmental noise. Whisper v3 Turbo balances accuracy and efficiency, suggesting strong potential for EMS applications. Conclusion: This study introduces a clinically grounded, noise-robust benchmark for STT evaluation in EMS settings. It highlights the importance of domain-specific metrics and acoustic realism for deploying STT systems where transcription errors carry safety-critical consequences.
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.