ArticleAnnals of general psychiatry2026
Speech analysis for differentiating bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder during euthymic states.
Article in Annals of general psychiatry, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDifferentiating major depressive disorder (MDD) from bipolar disorder (BP) is crucial for early diagnosis and targeted treatment. This study investigates speech, linguistic biomarkers, and machine learning models to differentiate between the MDD and BP patients using speech analysis during symptom-free periods.
methodsVoice recordings from 191 patients (41 BP, 150 MDD) during euthymic phases were analyzed. Linguistic metrics, sentiment scores, and acoustic features were extracted and compared between the groups. Various machine learning models were employed to classify diagnoses based on these features.
resultsSignificant differences were observed between BP and MDD patients. BP patients exhibited a shorter pause durations per total speaking duration and total word count (0.19 vs. 0.29; p < 0.05, 0.07 vs. 0.12; p < 0.05). MDD patients showed greater variability in speech intensity and peak amplitude during euthymic states. Sentiment analysis revealed no significant differences in broader emotional dimensions. Among the models tested, the Random Forest classifier achieved the highest predictive performance (AUC = 0.807), underscoring its effectiveness in differentiating BP from MDD.
conclusionSpeech analysis during euthymic periods reveals distinct linguistic and acoustic patterns between MDD and BP patients. These findings highlight the potential of speech features as non-invasive biomarkers for mood disorder classification, offering promising avenues for enhancing clinical decision-making. However, given the sample size, the results are preliminary and warrant replication in larger, independent cohorts.
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.