Cited by 65Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

A Comparison of Connected Speech Tasks for Detecting Early Alzheimer’s Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning

Open access
Clarke, Natasha, Barrick, Thomas R., Garrard, Peter·2021·Frontiers in Computer Science

Abstract

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) has a long pre-clinical period, and so there is a crucial need for early detection, including of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Computational analysis of connected speech using Natural Language Processing and machine learning has been found to indicate disease and could be utilized as a rapid, scalable test for early diagnosis. However, there has been a focus on the Cookie Theft picture description task, which has been criticized. Fifty participants were recruited – 25 healthy controls (HC), 25 mild AD or MCI (AD+MCI) – and these completed five connected speech tasks: picture description, a conversational map reading task, recall of an overlearned narrative, procedural recall and narration of a wordless picture book. A high-dimensional set of linguistic features were automatically extracted from each transcript and used to train Support Vector Machines to classify groups. Performance varied, with accuracy for HC vs. AD+MCI classification ranging from 62% using picture book narration to 78% using overlearned narrative features. This study shows that, importantly, the conditions of the speech task have an impact on the discourse produced, which influences accuracy in detection of AD beyond the length of the sample. Further, we report the features important for classification using different tasks, showing that a focus on the Cookie Theft picture description task may narrow the understanding of how early AD pathology impacts speech.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fcomp.2021.634360

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clarke, N., Barrick, T. R., & Garrard, P.
Affiliations
St George's, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Clarke, Natasha
Venue
Frontiers in Computer Science
Published
2021-05-31
Volume
3
ISSN
2624-9898 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3168517739
Cited by
65
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10
FWCI
7.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Computer Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment, early diagnosis, connected speech, speech analysis, picture description task, linguistic features, discourse features, map reading, support vector machine, speech biomarkers

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