Home › Research › Digital health tools
Detection of dementia on voice recordings using deep learning: a Framingham Heart Study
Xue C, Karjadi C, Paschalidis IC, Au R, Kolachalama VB.. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2021-08-31
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Identification of reliable, affordable, and easy-to-use strategies for detection of dementia is sorely needed. Digital technologies, such as individual voice recordings, offer an attractive modality to assess cognition but methods that could automatically analyze such data are not readily available. Methods and findings We used 1264 voice recordings of neuropsychological examinations administered to participants from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS), a community-based longitudinal observational study. The recordings were 73 min in duration, on average, and contained at least two speakers (participant and examiner). Of the total voice recordings, 483 were of participants with normal cognition (NC), 451 recordings were of participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 330 were of participants with dementia (DE). We developed two deep learning models (a two-level long short-term memory (LSTM) network and a convolutional neural network (CNN)), which used the audio recordings to classify if the recording included a participant with only NC or only DE and to differentiate between recordings corresponding to those that had DE from those who did not have DE (i.e., NDE (NC+MCI)). Based on 5-fold cross-validation, the LSTM model achieved a mean (±std) area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.740 ± 0.017, mean balanced accuracy of 0.647 ± 0.027, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.596 ± 0.047 in classifying cases with DE from those with NC. The CNN model achieved a mean AUC of 0.805 ± 0.027, mean balanced accuracy of 0.743 ± 0.015, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.742 ± 0.033 in classifying cases with DE from those with NC. For the task related to the classification of participants with DE from NDE, the LSTM model achieved a mean AUC of 0.734 ± 0.014, mean balanced accuracy of 0.675 ± 0.013, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.671 ± 0.015. The CNN model achieved a mean AUC of 0.746 ± 0.021, mean balanced accuracy of 0.652 ± 0.020, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.635 ± 0.031 in classifying cases with DE from those who were NDE. Conclusion This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that automated deep learning-driven processing of audio recordings of neuropsychological testing performed on individuals recruited within a community cohort setting can facilitate dementia screening.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Xue, C., Karjadi, C., Paschalidis, I. C., Au, R., & Kolachalama, V. B. (2021). Detection of dementia on voice recordings using deep learning: a Framingham Heart Study. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-021-00888-3
Vancouver
Xue C, Karjadi C, Paschalidis IC, Au R, Kolachalama VB. Detection of dementia on voice recordings using deep learning: a Framingham Heart Study. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2021. doi:10.1186/s13195-021-00888-3. PMID: 34465384.
BibTeX
@article{xue2021-34465384,
author = {Xue, C. and Karjadi, C. and Paschalidis, I. C. and Au, R. and Kolachalama, V. B.},
title = {{Detection of dementia on voice recordings using deep learning: a Framingham Heart Study}},
journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1186/s13195-021-00888-3},
pmid = {34465384},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-021-00888-3}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Based on 5-fold cross-validation, the LSTM model achieved a mean (±std) area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.740 ± 0.017, mean balanced accuracy of 0.647 ± 0.027, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.596 ± 0.047 in classifying cases with DE from those with NC.
- The CNN model achieved a mean AUC of 0.805 ± 0.027, mean balanced accuracy of 0.743 ± 0.015, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.742 ± 0.033 in classifying cases with DE from those with NC.
- For the task related to the classification of participants with DE from NDE, the LSTM model achieved a mean AUC of 0.734 ± 0.014, mean balanced accuracy of 0.675 ± 0.013, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.671 ± 0.015.
- The CNN model achieved a mean AUC of 0.746 ± 0.021, mean balanced accuracy of 0.652 ± 0.020, and mean weighted F1 score of 0.635 ± 0.031 in classifying cases with DE from those who were NDE.
- Conclusion This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that automated deep learning-driven processing of audio recordings of neuropsychological testing performed on individuals recruited within a community cohort setting can facilitate dementia screening.
Why it matters
In 1,264 audio recordings of memory-and-thinking test sessions from the Framingham Heart Study, two deep learning models were trained to tell recordings of people with dementia apart from those without it. The best model separated dementia from normal cognition with an AUC of 0.805 (balanced accuracy 0.743), but accuracy fell when people with mild cognitive impairment were counted in the non-dementia group (best AUC 0.746). The authors call it a proof-of-concept for automated screening from recordings averaging 73 minutes; it is not a validated diagnostic test and reports no treatment or prevention.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Alzheimer s Research & Therapy: journal h-index 146 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 4 / 7 | Cited 79 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 11.3 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 8.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 8 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 50 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Vijaya B. Kolachalama: h-index 36 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | Boston University: institution h-index 1,456 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34465384) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 55 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1186/s13195-021-00888-3
- PubMed: 34465384
- Original source →
- Free full text: Alzheimer s Research & Therapy →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
8 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “prevalence”
1,224 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,224 tagged studies.