DE eng

Search in the Catalogues and Directories

Hits 1 – 6 of 6

1
Using language processing and speech analysis for the identification of psychosis and other disorders
In: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging (2020)
BASE
Show details
2
Language as a Biomarker for Psychosis: A Natural Language Processing Approach
In: Schizophr Res (2020)
BASE
Show details
3
S19. ANALYZING NEGATIVE SYMPTOMS AND LANGUAGE IN YOUTHS AT RISK FOR PSYCHOSIS USING AUTOMATED LANGUAGE ANALYSIS
Stanislawski, Emma; Bilgrami, Zarina; Sarac, Cansu. - : Oxford University Press, 2019
BASE
Show details
4
24.2 NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING STUDIES OF PSYCHOSIS AND ITS RISK STATES
Cecchi, Guillermo; Gutierrez, Elkin; Corcoran, Cheryl. - : Oxford University Press, 2019
BASE
Show details
5
T35. SPEED OF FACE PROCESSING PREDICTS PSYCHOSIS IN AT-RISK YOUTHS
Bilgrami, Zarina; Benavides, Caridad; Sarac, Cansu. - : Oxford University Press, 2019
BASE
Show details
6
Prediction of psychosis across protocols and risk cohorts using automated language analysis
Abstract: Language and speech are the primary source of data for psychiatrists to diagnose and treat mental disorders. In psychosis, the very structure of language can be disturbed, including semantic coherence (e.g., derailment and tangentiality) and syntactic complexity (e.g., concreteness). Subtle disturbances in language are evident in schizophrenia even prior to first psychosis onset, during prodromal stages. Using computer‐based natural language processing analyses, we previously showed that, among English‐speaking clinical (e.g., ultra) high‐risk youths, baseline reduction in semantic coherence (the flow of meaning in speech) and in syntactic complexity could predict subsequent psychosis onset with high accuracy. Herein, we aimed to cross‐validate these automated linguistic analytic methods in a second larger risk cohort, also English‐speaking, and to discriminate speech in psychosis from normal speech. We identified an automated machine‐learning speech classifier – comprising decreased semantic coherence, greater variance in that coherence, and reduced usage of possessive pronouns – that had an 83% accuracy in predicting psychosis onset (intra‐protocol), a cross‐validated accuracy of 79% of psychosis onset prediction in the original risk cohort (cross‐protocol), and a 72% accuracy in discriminating the speech of recent‐onset psychosis patients from that of healthy individuals. The classifier was highly correlated with previously identified manual linguistic predictors. Our findings support the utility and validity of automated natural language processing methods to characterize disturbances in semantics and syntax across stages of psychotic disorder. The next steps will be to apply these methods in larger risk cohorts to further test reproducibility, also in languages other than English, and identify sources of variability. This technology has the potential to improve prediction of psychosis outcome among at‐risk youths and identify linguistic targets for remediation and preventive intervention. More broadly, automated linguistic analysis can be a powerful tool for diagnosis and treatment across neuropsychiatry.
Keyword: Research Reports
URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775133/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29352548
https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20491
BASE
Hide details

Catalogues
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bibliographies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Linked Open Data catalogues
0
Online resources
0
0
0
0
Open access documents
6
0
0
0
0
© 2013 - 2024 Lin|gu|is|tik | Imprint | Privacy Policy | Datenschutzeinstellungen ändern