Berisha, Visar

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate how speech signal compression algorithms affect the acoustic and perceptual characteristics of dysarthric speech. As telepractice becomes more common in speech-language pathology, particularly in the assessment of dysarthria, understanding the impact of telecommunication compression on speech fidelity is essential for clinical decision making. Method: Speech samples were collected from 15 individuals with dysarthria, recorded locally and simultaneously via Zoom (Version 6.2.11). The Opus codec was used to process the locally recorded speech samples under fullband, wideband, and narrowband compression conditions. Acoustic measures were derived for all samples. Twenty experienced speech-language pathologists (SLPs) rated vocal quality and nasality for sustained vowels and rated articulatory precision and orthographically transcribed sentences across each condition. Results: Narrowband compression was associated with significantly degraded voice quality measures (e.g., harmonic-to-noise ratio, shimmer) and reduced transcription accuracy. Despite these changes in acoustics and intelligibility, ratings of articulatory precision, nasality, and vocal quality remained stable across conditions, suggesting SLPs could adjust for compression artifacts when making perceptual judgments. Conclusions: Speech compression, particularly in low-bandwidth (i.e., narrow) condition, impacts acoustic fidelity and intelligibility, though expert listeners maintain reliable perceptual judgments. These findings underscore the need to consider compression effects in telepractice and highlight the importance of developing optimized protocols for remote dysarthria assessment.

Purpose: Model interpretability is a critical requirement for deploying artificial intelligence (AI) applications in clinical speech settings, yet existing evaluation methods often overlook this aspect. The complex nature of speech features and the opaque decision-making processes of AI models underscore the need for a tailored framework to assess interpretability in speech-based clinical AI systems. This article proposes an initial framework composed of eight key factors to consider when evaluating the interpretability of clinical speech AI models. These factors are categorized into two groups: functional factors and clinician-centered factors. The functional factors, which can be assessed independently without user involvement, include faithfulness and computational efficiency. The clinician-centered factors include four established ones from existing literature (cognitive load, human–AI task performance, mental model, and user trust) and two new factors tailored to the unique demands of clinical speech applications: clinical understandability and decision relevance. We further suggest evaluation methods for each of the identified factors and propose modifying existing instruments such as the System Usability Scale and the Healthcare Systems Usability Scale to evaluate the two newly introduced factors. Conclusions: Our identified factors form an initial framework for evaluating the interpretability of speech-based clinical AI systems, supporting the effective integration of AI into clinical workflows. Future works include conducting an evaluation experiment using the proposed framework and refining it further based on the findings from the experiment.

Objectives/Goals: Aspiration causes or aggravates lung diseases. While bedside swallow evaluations are not sensitive/specific, gold standard tests for aspiration are invasive, uncomfortable, expose patients to radiation, and are resource intensive. We propose the development and validation of an AI model that analyzes voice to noninvasively predict aspiration. Methods/Study Population: Retrospectively recorded [i] phonations from 163 unique ENT patients were analyzed for acoustic features including jitter, shimmer, harmonic to noise ratio (HNR), etc. Patients were classified into three groups: aspirators (Penetration-Aspiration Scale, PAS 6–8), probable (PAS 3–5), and non-aspirators (PAS 1–2) based on video fluoroscopic swallow (VFSS) findings. Multivariate analysis evaluated patient demographics, history of head and neck surgery, radiation, neurological illness, obstructive sleep apnea, esophageal disease, body mass index, and vocal cord dysfunction. Supervised machine learning using five folds cross-validated neural additive network modelling (NAM) was performed on the phonations of aspirator versus non-aspirators. The model was then validated using an independent, external database. Results/Anticipated Results: Aspirators were found to have quantifiably worse quality of sound with higher jitter and shimmer but lower harmonics noise ratio. NAM modeling classified aspirators and non-aspirators as distinct groups (aspirator NAM risk score 0.528+0.2478 (mean + std) vs. non-aspirator (control) risk score of 0.252+0.241 (mean + std); p Discussion/Significance of Impact: We report the use of voice as a novel, noninvasive biomarker to detect aspiration risk using machine learning techniques. This tool has the potential to be used for the safe and early detection of aspiration in a variety of clinical settings including intensive care units, wards, outpatient clinics, and remote monitoring.

Abstract Background Slower speaking rates and higher pause rates are found in individuals with migraine or post‐traumatic headache during headache compared to when headache‐free. We aimed to determine whether headache intensity influences the speaking rate and pause rate of participants with migraine or acute post‐traumatic headache (aPTH) following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods Using a speech elicitation tool, participants with migraine, aPTH, and healthy controls (HC) submitted speech samples over a period of 3 months. Speaking and pause rates were calculated when participants were headache‐free and when they had mild or moderate headache. In this observational study, speaking and pause rates in participants with migraine and aPTH were compared to HC, controlling for age, sex, and days since mTBI (participants with aPTH only). Results A total of 2902 longitudinal speech samples from 13 individuals with migraine (mean age = 33.5, SD = 6.6; 12 females/1 male), 43 individuals with aPTH (mean age = 44.4, SD = 13.5; 28 females/15 males), and 56 HC (mean age = 40.8, SD = 13.0; 36 females/20 males) were collected. There was no difference in speaking rate between HC and the combined headache cohort of participants (migraine and aPTH) when they had headache freedom or a mild headache. When participants had moderate intensity headache, their speaking rate was significantly slower compared to that of HC and compared to their speaking rate during mild headache intensity or headache freedom. For the combined headache cohort of participants, pause rates were significantly higher when they had headache freedom or had a headache of mild or moderate intensity relative to HC. Compared to participants' pause rate during headache freedom, their pause rate was significantly higher during mild and moderate headache intensity. Participants with aPTH had significantly slower speaking rates compared to participants with migraine during headache freedom, mild headache intensity, and moderate headache intensity. Participants with aPTH had significantly higher pause rates compared to participants with migraine when experiencing moderate headache intensity. Discussion For both aPTH and migraine, more severe headache pain was associated with higher pause rates and slower speaking rates, suggesting that speaking rate and pause rate could serve as objective biomarkers for headache‐related pain. Slower speaking rate in participants with aPTH could reflect additional consequences of TBI‐related effects on motor control and speech production.

Background Our prior work demonstrated that questionnaires assessing psychosocial symptoms have utility for predicting improvement in patients with acute post-traumatic headache following mild traumatic brain injury. In this cohort study, we aimed to determine whether prediction accuracy can be refined by adding structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain measures to the model. Methods Adults with acute post-traumatic headache (enrolled 0–59 days post-mild traumatic brain injury) underwent T1-weighted brain MRI and completed three questionnaires (Sports Concussion Assessment Tool, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and the Trait Anxiety Inventory Scale). Individuals with post-traumatic headache completed an electronic headache diary allowing for determination of headache improvement at three- and at six-month follow-up. Questionnaire and MRI measures were used to train prediction models of headache improvement and headache trajectory. Results Forty-three patients with post-traumatic headache (mean age = 43.0, SD = 12.4; 27 females/16 males) and 61 healthy controls were enrolled (mean age = 39.1, SD = 12.8; 39 females/22 males). The best model achieved cross-validation Area Under the Curve of 0.801 and 0.805 for predicting headache improvement at three and at six months. The top contributing MRI features for the prediction included curvature and thickness of superior, middle, and inferior temporal, fusiform, inferior parietal, and lateral occipital regions. Patients with post-traumatic headache who did not improve by three months had less thickness and higher curvature measures and notably greater baseline differences in brain structure vs. healthy controls (thickness: p < 0.001, curvature: p = 0.012) than those who had headache improvement. Conclusions A model including clinical questionnaire data and measures of brain structure accurately predicted headache improvement in patients with post-traumatic headache and achieved improvement compared to a model developed using questionnaire data alone.