ArticleCommunications medicine2026
Deep neural network-based analysis of voice biomarkers for monitoring treatment response in adolescent major depressive disorder.
Article in Communications medicine, 2026. 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.
- Deep neural network-based analysis of voice biomarkers for monitoring treatment response in adolescent major depressive disorder.Communications medicine · 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
Abstract
backgroundIn adolescents, identifying objective biomarkers for treatment response is crucial for the development of effective interventions. Voice-based biomarkers have recently shown potential to capture treatment-related changes in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). While prior studies have been cross-sectional experiments with single speech sample, this study addresses a critical gap by evaluating intra-patient changes in speech over treatment period, providing insight into how these voice biomarkers evolve within individuals.
methodsWe collected pre- and post-treatment voice samples from 48 adolescent MDD patients. We hypothesized that deep learning models could detect clinically meaningful changes in depressive states during treatment. Therefore, we compared machine learning and deep learning models for depressive classification. Additionally, we introduced the Dual Voice-based Depressive State Analysis (DVDSA) method to categorize intra-patient depressive state changes as recovery, worsening, or unchanged, highlighting the deep learning models' ability to detect these variations.
resultsAmong the acoustic features, only the fundamental frequency exhibits significant changes between pre- and post-treatment states after Holm-Bonferroni correction. Machine learning models demonstrate limited performance in distinguishing treatment states, with the best F1-score reaching 65.83%. In contrast, deep learning model, particularly WavLM, achieves remarkably higher performance in binary classification, with an F1-score of 78.05%. The WavLM maintains robust performance, when applied to the DVDSA method, achieves an F1-score of 70.58%.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that machine learning models and individual acoustic features may not sufficiently capture treatment-related changes in MDD patients. This study underscores the value of deep learning models using the DVDSA method, addressing the limitations of pre- and post-treatment classification and highlighting their potential to advance personalized treatment strategies for adolescent MDD.
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.