Cited by 54Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies

Toward the Automation of Diagnostic Conversation Analysis in Patients with Memory Complaints

Mirheidari, Bahman, Blackburn, Daniel, Harkness, Kirsty, Walker, Traci, Venneri, Annalena, Reuber, Markus, Christensen, Heidi·2017·Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease

Abstract

Background: The early diagnosis of dementia is of great clinical and social importance. A recent study using the qualitative methodology of conversation analysis (CA) demonstrated that language and communication problems are evident during interactions between patients and neurologists, and that interactional observations can be used to differentiate between cognitive difficulties due to neurodegenerative disorders (ND) or functional memory disorders (FMD). Objective: This study explores whether the differential diagnostic analysis of doctor-patient interactions in a memory clinic can be automated. Methods: Verbatim transcripts of conversations between neurologists and patients initially presenting with memory problems to a specialist clinic were produced manually (15 with FMD, and 15 with ND). A range of automatically detectable features focusing on acoustic, lexical, semantic, and visual information contained in the transcripts were defined aiming to replicate the diagnostic qualitative observations. The features were used to train a set of five machine learning classifiers to distinguish between ND and FMD. Results: The mean rate of correct classification between ND and FMD was 93% ranging from 97% by the Perceptron classifier to 90% by the Random Forest classifier.Using only the ten best features, the mean correct classification score increased to 95%. Conclusion: This pilot study provides proof-of-principle that a machine learning approach to analyzing transcripts of interactions between neurologists and patients describing memory problems can distinguish people with neurodegenerative dementia from people with FMD.

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 · 10.3233/jad-160507

Cites

46 of 46 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

1 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [27][27] Rey A (1964) Lexamen clinique en psychologie , Presses universitaires de France., 2nd edition. -
  2. [28][28] Raven JC (1995) Coloured Progressive Matrices Sets A, Ab, B. Manual Sections 1 & 2 , Oxford Psychologists Press. -
  3. [42][42] Guyon I, Elissee ff A (2003) An introduction to variable and feature selection, Journal of Machine Learning Research 3 1157-1182. -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mirheidari, B., Blackburn, D., Harkness, K., Walker, T., Venneri, A., Reuber, M., & Christensen, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Royal Hallamshire Hospital (GB)
  • IRCCS San Camillo Hospital (IT)
Corresponding author
Mirheidari, Bahman
Venue
Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
Published
2016-04-15
Volume
58
Issue
2
Pages
373-387
ISSN
  • 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-8908
OpenAlex
W2606308239
Cited by
54
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8
FWCI
5.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Keywords
doctor-patient interaction
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Aged, Automation, Communication, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Memory Disorders, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Physician-Patient Relations, Retrospective Studies, Neurodegenerative Diseases

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