Abstract
Background and Hypothesis Mapping a patient’s speech as a network has proved to be a useful way of understanding formal thought disorder in psychosis. However, to date, graph theory tools have not incorporated the semantic content of speech, which is altered in psychosis.
Study Design We developed an algorithm, “netts”, to map the semantic content of speech as a network, then applied netts to construct semantic speech networks for a general population sample, and a clinical sample comprising patients with first episode psychosis (FEP), people at clinical high risk of psychosis (CHR-P), and healthy controls.
Study Results Semantic speech networks from the general population were more connected than size-matched randomised networks, with fewer and larger connected components, reflecting the non-random nature of speech. Networks from FEP patients were smaller than from healthy participants, for a picture description task but not a story recall task. For the former task, FEP networks were also more fragmented than those from controls; showing more, smaller connected components. CHR-P networks showed fragmentation values in-between FEP patients and controls. A clustering analysis suggested that semantic speech networks captured novel signal not already described by existing NLP measures. Network features were also related to negative symptom scores and scores on the Thought and Language Index, although these relationships did not survive correcting for multiple comparisons.
Conclusions Overall, these data suggest that semantic networks can enable deeper phenotyping of formal thought disorder in psychosis. We are releasing Netts as an open Python package alongside this manuscript.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
We thank the services users and volunteers who took part in this study, and the members of the Outreach and Support in South London (OASIS) team who were involved in the recruitment, management and clinical follow-up of the participants reported in this manuscript. SEM was supported by the Accelerate Programme for Scientific Discovery, funded by Schmidt Futures and a Fellowship from The Alan Turing Institute, London. PEV is supported by a fellowship from MQ: Transforming Mental Health (MQF17_24). This work was supported by The Alan Turing Institute under the EPSRC grant EP/N510129/1, the UK Medical Research Council (MRC, grant number G0700995), the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014), the King's Health Partners (Research and Development Challenge Fund) and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, MRC or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funder had no influence on the design of the study or interpretation of the results.
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:
Ethical approval for the clinical study was obtained from the Institute of Psychiatry Research Ethics Committee, whilst ethical approval for the general population study was obtained from the Kings College London Research Ethics Committee. Ethical approval for the general population study was obtained through Kings College London [REMAS MRA-19/20-19444]. Data collected via Gorilla was compliant with EU GDPR2016 and Gorillas Data Processing Agreement, consistent with NIHR guidance.
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
↵* Joint last authorship
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
