Abstract
Introduction Detecting voice disorders from voice recordings could allow for frequent, remote, and low-cost screening before costly clinical visits and a more invasive laryngoscopy examination. Our goals were to detect unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP) from voice recordings using machine learning, to identify which acoustic variables were important for prediction to increase trust, and to determine model performance relative to clinician performance.
Methods Patients with confirmed UVFP through endoscopic examination (N=77) and controls with normal voices matched for age and sex (N=77) were included. Voice samples were elicited by reading the Rainbow Passage and sustaining phonation of the vowel “a”. Four machine learning models of differing complexity were used. SHAP was used to identify important features.
Results The highest median bootstrapped ROC AUC score was 0.87 and beat clinician’s performance (range: 0.74 – 0.81) based on the recordings. Counterintuitively, many UVFP recordings had higher intensity than controls. We used clinician’s ratings to provide evidence that UVFP patients who tend to have weaker voices were over-projecting their voices and being recorded with a higher microphone gain than controls, which allowed the models to use this recording idiosyncrasy to improve classification. Interestingly, when removing all variables associated with intensity variables in order to mitigate bias, the models were still able to achieve similar high performance.
Conclusion Using the largest dataset studying UVFP to date, we achieve high performance from just a few seconds of voice recordings, surpassing expert clinicians’ performance. We uncovered bias which may occur in voice biomarker research any time individuals have a soft voice. We provide a set of recommendations to avoid bias when building and evaluating machine learning models for screening in laryngology. Explainable machine learning thus provides a mechanism to detect UVFP, uncover how acoustic variables characterize a specific pathophysiology, and reveal bias.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
We would like to thank Cody Sullivan and Carolyn Hsu for their help in rating the audio samples and thank Daryush Mehta, Robert Hillman, and John Guttag for their feedback on an earlier version of this study. DML was supported by a National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders T32 training grant [5T32DC000038-28], a RallyPoint Fellowship, and an Amelia Peabody Professional Development Award. The work was supported by a gift to the McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT. SSG was partially supported by National Institutes of Health grants for the development of pydra-ml [R01 EB020740], for reproducible practices [P41 EB019936], and the Bridge2AI voice data generation project [1OT2OD032720-01]. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary and Partners Healthcare (IRB 2019002711).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Added CPP results and table of recommendations plus more editing throughout
Data Availability
All data and code are available through Github (https://github.com/danielmlow/vfp) and Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5009208) including a tutorial to test our models on your own data (https://github.com/danielmlow/vfp/blob/main/vfp_detector.ipynb).
