ArticleJAMA neurology2026
Acoustic Analysis of Primary Care Patient-Clinician Conversations to Screen for Cognitive Impairment.
Article in JAMA neurology, 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
- Commented on by
- Update of
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Cognitive impairment (CI) is often underdetected in primary care due to time and resource constraints. Passive analysis of clinical dialogue may offer an accessible approach for screening. Objective: To assess whether audio recordings of patient-physician dialogue during routine primary care visits can be used to identify CI using acoustic speech features and machine learning (ML). Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study, conducted from August 2020 through December 2021 among older primary care patients, involved audio recording primary care visits using a microphone and portable device. An external validation cohort was recruited in a separate city to assess reproducibility of findings. Analysis was performed from January 2025 through June 2025. The study was conducted in primary care practices in New York, New York, with additional participants recruited from primary care practices in Chicago, Illinois, for validation. Eligible patients were recruited from primary care practices during routine visits with no prior diagnosis of mild CI or dementia. The study included English-speaking patients aged 55 years and older without documented history of dementia or mild CI. For validation, patients meeting the same eligibility criteria were recruited from primary care practices in Chicago. Exposure: Multiple 30-second speech segments were extracted from recordings. Acoustic features were derived using foundation models (Whisper, HuBERT, wav2vec 2.0) and expert-defined methods (eGeMAPS, prosody). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome, CI, was defined as Montreal Cognitive Assessment score 1.0 or more standard deviations below age- and education-adjusted norms. ML classifiers were trained to predict CI status from audio recordings. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and maximum F1 score (Fmax) were calculated for identifying participants with CI. Results: The study included 787 English-speaking patients aged 55 years and older without documented history of dementia or mild CI and an additional 179 patients meeting the same eligibility criteria for validation. In total, 966 participants were recruited, among whom 530 (55%) were female, mean (SD) age was 67.2 (8.1) years, and CI prevalence was 21%. Models using Whisper-derived acoustic features performed best (AUROC, 0.733; 95% CI, 0.714-0.752; Fmax[CI], 0.502; 95% CI, 0.471-0.533). Results generalized to the external site with similar performance (AUROC, 0.727; 95% CI, 0.714-0.740; Fmax[CI], 0.459; 95% CI, 0.441-0.477). Model interpretation identified pitch, timing, and variability features as key predictors. When used for screening, the algorithm achieved positive predictive value of 30.4% (95% CI, 28.7%-32.1%), sensitivity of 68.2% (95% CI, 61.8%-74.6%), and specificity of 63.6% (95% CI, 59.8%-67.4%) on the holdout cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: In this diagnostic study, ML models trained on acoustic features from brief clinical conversations identified CI with high accuracy. These findings support the feasibility of passive, speech-based screening during routine primary care.
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.