ArticleArXiv2026
Cross-Domain Transfer of Depression Voice Biomarkers Depends on the Outcome Instrument: Leakage-Controlled Cross-Sectional Evaluation Study.
Article in ArXiv, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Voice-based depression screening is commercializing rapidly, yet whether voice biomarkers generalize across clinical settings is largely untested. Generalization is usually framed as a question about populations, but it is also a question about the outcome instrument a model is scored against: reported accuracy varies with the diagnostic criteria a study adopts, but confounded with everything else differing between studies. Objective: We tested whether depression voice biomarkers transfer between perinatal and general-psychiatric speech in both directions under strict leakage control, and whether transfer depends on which self-report instrument defines the outcome. Methods: In a cross-sectional US-nationwide online study, 446 sessions from 390 pregnant participants at 22±1 weeks' gestation (analytical sample N=316, one per participant) each provided four voice recordings, the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8), and a modified nine-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (mEPDS-9). We extracted 375 acoustic descriptors and 330-dimensional Population Dynamics Foundation Model (PDFM) community-health embeddings. Discrimination (area under the curve, AUC) was assessed under leakage-controlled cross-validation, with feature and classifier selection inside training folds only, gated by a permutation negative-control harness, across a pre-specified grid of 4 speech tasks × 4 outcome definitions. The prenatal-trained model was applied to two general-psychiatric corpora (DAIC-WOZ, N=189; E-DAIC, N=219) under pure held-out inference, and an open-source model (DAM) trained on ~35,000 individuals was applied to all three cohorts without refitting. Multiplicity was controlled by the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure. Results: The pre-registered within-cohort outcome performed at chance (AUC 0.494, 95% CI 0.431-0.560), and no cell of the 16-cell grid survived multiplicity adjustment under either modeling paradigm. The prenatal-trained model did not transfer to either general-psychiatric corpus (AUC 0.505, 0.478). Transfer measured in the reverse direction, however, varied with the outcome instrument: DAM reached AUC 0.706-0.708 on general-psychiatric speech, 0.510 (0.411-0.609) against the PHQ-8 in pregnant women, and 0.645 (0.541-0.744) against the mEPDS-9 Conclusions: Whether a depression voice biomarker transfers may depend not only on the population but on whether the outcome instrument captures what the model can detect: in the same pregnant participants, a general-population speech model discriminated better against the mEPDS-9 than against the PHQ-8. Validation of voice-based mental-health tools should state the population, the elicitation task, and the outcome instrument together, and a tool validated against one instrument should not be assumed to work against another. Trial Registration: Preregistered on the Open Science Framework.[1].
Indexed as
Identifiers
42818543PMC13622871What 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.