Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Protocol for a conversation-based analysis study: PREVENT-ED investigates dialogue features that may help predict dementia onset in later life
  1. Sofia de la Fuente Garcia1,
  2. Craig W Ritchie2,
  3. Saturnino Luz1
  1. 1 Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh School of Molecular Genetic and Population Health Sciences, Edinburgh, UK
  2. 2 Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, Department of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  1. Correspondence to Sofia de la Fuente Garcia; sofia.delafuente{at}ed.ac.uk

Abstract

Introduction Decreasing the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a global public health priority. Early detection of AD is an important requisite for the implementation of prevention strategies towards this goal. While it is plausible that patients at the early stages of AD may exhibit subtle behavioural signs of neurodegeneration, neuropsychological testing seems unable to detect these signs in preclinical AD. Recent studies indicate that spontaneous speech data, which can be collected frequently and naturally, provide good predictors for AD detection in cohorts with a clinical diagnosis. The potential of models based on such data for detecting preclinical AD remains unknown.

Methods and analysis The PREVENT-Elicitation of Dialogues (PREVENT-ED) study builds on the PREVENT Dementia project to investigate whether early behavioural signs of AD may be detected through dialogue interaction. Participants recruited through PREVENT, aged 40–59 at baseline, will be included in this study. We will use speech processing and machine learning methods to assess how well speech and visuospatial markers agree with neuropsychological, biomarker, clinical, lifestyle and genetic data from the PREVENT cohort.

Ethics and dissemination There are no expected risks or burdens to participants. The procedures are not invasive and do not raise significant ethical issues. We only approach healthy consenting adults and all participants will be informed that this is an exploratory study and therefore has no diagnostic aim. Confidentiality aspects such as data encryption and storage comply with the General Data Protection Regulation and with the requirements from sponsoring bodies and ethical committees. This study has been granted ethical approval by the London-Surrey Research Ethics Committee (REC reference No: 18/LO/0860), and by Caldicott and Information Governance (reference No: CRD18048). PREVENT-ED results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

  • dementia prevention
  • dialogue analysis
  • early detection of Alzheimer’s disease
  • screening
  • psycholinguistics
  • dialogue analysis
  • speech processing
  • computational paralinguistics

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors SdlFG codesigned the experiment, elaborated the map and the map task’s narrative, wrote the initial draft of the paper and revised it following revision and input from coauthors. CWR helped design the experiment, revised and provided feedback on the text and cosupervised the work. SL conceived the idea of using a dialogue task for cognitive state assessment, codesigned the experiment, wrote and revised the text, and cosupervised the work. All authors read and approved the final version of the paper.

  • Funding This work is supported by the Medical Research Council (MRC), grant number MR/N013166/1.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval This study has been granted approval by the London-Surrey Research Ethics Committee (REC reference No: 18/LO/0860), and by Caldicott and Information Governance (reference No: CRD18048).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.