ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Outside the healthy bounds: reference intervals for population and individual-level medical speech analysis.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reference intervals (RIs) are a well-established clinical tool for defining healthy bounds of laboratory measures. Recently, they have been applied to acoustic features extracted from speech to provide a transparent and disorder-agnostic perspective on symptomatic speakers. We evaluate the potential and limitations of RIs across three datasets: clean, laboratory recordings from people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) and two noisy datasets targeting respiratory symptoms and work-related stress, collected under everyday-life conditions. At the population level, we compare the proportion of features outside the RI bounds between control and symptomatic groups, test noise augmentation of the RI-estimation corpus for improved robustness, and identify the most indicative acoustic features for each health condition. At the individual level, we derive a per-speaker deviation score that quantifies how far each speaker's acoustic profile deviates from the healthy reference, and assess its discriminative ability using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Noise augmentation of the healthy reference corpus yields similar population-level separation; the continuous
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.