ArticlePloS one2025
Reliability, validity, and correlates of an AI voice emotion recognition app among nurses.
Article in PloS one, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital tools are increasingly widespread in healthcare, particularly in the fields of emotion recognition and mental health assessment.
objectivesThis study evaluated whether an artificial intelligence (AI) voice emotion recognition (VER) app could identify nurses' emotions and explored its associations with their background and health conditions.
methodsThe emotions of 349 clinical nurses at a medical center in northern Taiwan were analyzed using an AI VER app and several standardized psychological questionnaires. To control for potential confounding variables, demographic and health-related factors including age, gender, work experience, exercise habits, and history of physical symptoms were collected and statistically adjusted in correlation analyses. Convergent validity was tested with Pearson's correlations, and test-retest reliability was evaluated in 30 nurses using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).
resultsSignificant correlations were observed between app-derived emotions and standard scales (anger: Novaco Anger Inventory-Short Form, r = .42; fear: Perceived Stress Scale, r = .41; happiness: Oxford Happiness Questionnaire, r = .45; and sadness: Beck Depression Inventory-II, r = .47; all p < .001). Multiple regression identified significant lifestyle and health predictors of emotions: less exercise predicted higher anger (β = .11, p = .025), peptic ulcers predicted greater fear (β = .19, p < .001), daily coffee predicted higher happiness (β = .11, p = .041), and irregular menstrual cycles predicted lower happiness (β = -.13, p = .014) and greater sadness (β = .30, p < .001). The AI VER app demonstrated good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.73-0.80).
conclusionPeptic ulcers, irregular menstrual cycles, and lack of exercise were associated with negative emotions such as fear, sadness, and anger. The AI VER app could objectively detect these emotional patterns in nurses, helping to identify emotional fluctuations early and support timely mental healthcare.
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.