4.6 Article

Detection of Clinical Depression in Adolescents' Speech During Family Interactions

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
卷 58, 期 3, 页码 574-586

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2010.2091640

关键词

Acoustic features; adolescents; clinical depression classification; naturalistic speech

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [LP0776235]
  2. Oregon Research Institute [R01 MH65340]
  3. Australian Research Council [LP0776235] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The properties of acoustic speech have previously been investigated as possible cues for depression in adults. However, these studies were restricted to small populations of patients and the speech recordings were made during patients' clinical interviews or fixed-text reading sessions. Symptoms of depression often first appear during adolescence at a time when the voice is changing, in both males and females, suggesting that specific studies of these phenomena in adolescent populations are warranted. This study investigated acoustic correlates of depression in a large sample of 139 adolescents (68 clinically depressed and 71 controls). Speech recordings were made during naturalistic interactions between adolescents and their parents. Prosodic, cepstral, spectral, and glottal features, as well as features derived from the Teager energy operator (TEO), were tested within a binary classification framework. Strong gender differences in classification accuracy were observed. The TEO-based features clearly outperformed all other features and feature combinations, providing classification accuracy ranging between 81%-87% for males and 72%-79% for females. Close, but slightly less accurate, results were obtained by combining glottal features with prosodic and spectral features (67%-69% for males and 70%-75% for females). These findings indicate the importance of nonlinear mechanisms associated with the glottal flow formation as cues for clinical depression.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据