Cited by 66Voice and Speech DisordersSpeech Recognition and SynthesisEmotion and Mood Recognition

Automatic evaluation of parkinson's speech — acoustic, prosodic and voice related cues

Bocklet, Tobias, Steidl, Stefan, Nöth, Elmar, Skodda, Sabine·2013·Interspeech 2013

Abstract

Articulation and phonation is affected in 70 % to 90 % of patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD). This study focuses on the question whether speech carries information about 1. PD being present at a speaker or not, and 2. estimating the sever-ity of PD (if present). We first perform classification experi-ments focusing on the automatic detection of PD as a 2-class problem (PD vs. healthy speakers). The detection of severity is described as a 3-class task based on the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) ratings. We employ acous-tic, prosodic and glottal features on different kinds of speech tests: various syllable repetition tasks, read sentences and texts, and monologues. Classification is performed in either case by SVMs. We report recognition results of 81.9 % when trying to differentiate between normally speaking persons and speakers with PD. With system fusion we achieved a recognition results of 59.1 % on the task of UPDRS classification. Index Terms: Parkinson’s Disease, pathologic speech, speech analysis

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21437/interspeech.2013-313

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bocklet, T., Steidl, S., Nöth, E., & Skodda, S.
Venue
Interspeech 2013
Publisher
ISCA
Published
2013-08-25
Pages
1149-1153
ISSN
2308-457X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2293992264
Cited by
66
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2
FWCI
25.13
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Interspeech (USB) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
Keywords
Parkinson's disease, speech analysis, automatic disease detection, disease severity assessment, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, acoustic features, prosodic features, glottal features, speech classification, support vector machine, system fusion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review