ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Speech feature identification model for depressed individuals with suicidal ideation based on autobiographical memory.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Smartphone-Based Acoustic Machine Learning Pipeline for Detecting Suicidal Ideation: Case-Control Model Development and Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSuicidal ideation in depression is a critical predictor of suicide risk, yet its objective and early identification remains a significant challenge. Current machine learning models often fail to distinguish specific markers of suicidality from the general symptoms of severe depression. This study aimed to develop and validate a multimodal model, integrating vocal features and autobiographical memory, to specifically distinguish depressed patients with suicidal ideation from those without.
methodsThis study enrolled 88 patients with depression, who were divided into three groups based on depression severity and the presence of suicidal ideation: mild depression without suicidal ideation(mD-NSI), moderate depression with suicidal ideation(MD-SI), and severe depression with suicidal ideation(SD-SI). Methodologies included the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT), clinical scales (BDI-II, OGMQ), and comprehensive vocal feature extraction. We used repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) for group comparisons and developed machine learning models, primarily Random Forest, for various classification tasks.
resultsSignificant differences were found in autobiographical memory; patients with suicidal ideation demonstrated significant overgeneralization, retrieving fewer specific memories than those without. Acoustically, individuals with suicidal ideation exhibited distinct vocal patterns, including reduced prosodic variation and altered spectral energy, indicated by features like Mel-Frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCCs), spectral centroid, and zero-crossing rate. A Random Forest model achieved high accuracy (AUC up to 1.00) in classification. Crucially, model interpretability analysis (SHAP) revealed that the predictive importance of features shifted depending on the clinical comparison: autobiographical memory scores were key for distinguishing the initial presence of suicidal ideation, whereas depression severity scores became more prominent when differentiating between moderate and severe cases who were already suicidal.
conclusionThe integrated analysis of vocal features and autobiographical memory, validated through an interpretable machine learning model, offers a powerful and objective approach for predicting suicidal ideation in depression. This multimodal method not only effectively differentiates patients with and without suicidal ideation but also provides novel insights into the shifting cognitive and physiological markers of suicide risk. It represents a significant step towards developing precise, clinically applicable tools for early risk identification and timely intervention. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.