Home › Research › Brain tissue and pathology
Speech Timing Measures Are Not Interchangeable Across Elicitation Methods in Senior Living Residents
Mekulu, K.; Etter, N.; Brearly, T.; Yang, H.. medRxiv (preprint), 2026-09-25
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Speech-based cognitive monitoring for Alzheimer's employs various tasks, but whether timing measures transfer across tasks is unclear. Twelve senior living residents completed four 60-second tasks: category fluency, two picture descriptions, and a self-generated narrative. Speech timing measures were calculated identically across tasks. Speech-rate correspondence among picture descriptions and narrative was substantial (mean Spearman rho; = 0.72). Correspondence with category fluency increased from Cookie Theft to contemporary picture to narrative in terms of speech rate (Spearman rho; = 0.36, 0.51, 0.64) and pause time ratio (Spearman rho; = 0.14, 0.45, 0.71). Measures were not interchangeable; correspondence followed an ordering consistent with shared retrieval demand.
Key findings
- Twelve senior living residents completed four 60-second tasks: category fluency, two picture descriptions, and a self-generated narrative.
- Speech timing measures were calculated identically across tasks.
- Speech-rate correspondence among picture descriptions and narrative was substantial (mean Spearman rho; = 0.72).
- Correspondence with category fluency increased from Cookie Theft to contemporary picture to narrative in terms of speech rate (Spearman rho; = 0.36, 0.51, 0.64) and pause time ratio (Spearman rho; = 0.14, 0.45, 0.71).
- Measures were not interchangeable; correspondence followed an ordering consistent with shared retrieval demand.
Why it matters
In a small group of 12 senior living residents, speech timing measures did not give the same results across different speaking tasks. This means these measures cannot be used interchangeably for monitoring cognition, and the study is very small and preliminary.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 19 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on impact for its field and year and senior author's track record, so those were left out: it earned 17 of the 90 points we could judge it on, which is 19 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv (preprint)) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 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 | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Hui Yang holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | Pennsylvania State University: institution h-index 1,397 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 17 / 90 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 17 of the 90 points we could judge it on is 19 out of 100. |
| Total | 19 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Mekulu, K., Etter, N., Brearly, T., & Yang, H. (2026). Speech Timing Measures Are Not Interchangeable Across Elicitation Methods in Senior Living Residents. medRxiv (preprint). https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.23.26363840
Vancouver
Mekulu K, Etter N, Brearly T, Yang H. Speech Timing Measures Are Not Interchangeable Across Elicitation Methods in Senior Living Residents. medRxiv (preprint). 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.09.23.26363840.
BibTeX
@article{mekulu2026-70094ff7,
author = {Mekulu, K. and Etter, N. and Brearly, T. and Yang, H.},
title = {{Speech Timing Measures Are Not Interchangeable Across Elicitation Methods in Senior Living Residents}},
journal = {medRxiv (preprint)},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.23.26363840},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.23.26363840}
}
Related studies in Brain tissue and pathology
Also in Brain tissue and pathology
124 studies in the library are filed under Brain tissue and pathology with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Brain tissue and pathology hub.