Abstract

ObjectiveA clinical decision tool for Transient Loss of Consciousness (TLOC) could reduce currently high misdiagnosis rates and waiting times for specialist assessments. Most clinical decision tools based on patient-reported symptom inventories only distinguish between two of the three most common causes of TLOC (epilepsy, functional /dissociative seizures, and syncope) or struggle with the particularly challenging differentiation between epilepsy and FDS. Based on previous research describing differences in spoken accounts of epileptic seizures and FDS seizures, this study explored the feasibility of predicting the cause of TLOC by combining the automated analysis of patient-reported symptoms and spoken TLOC descriptions. MethodParticipants completed an online web application that consisted of a 34-item medical history and symptom questionnaire (iPEP) and spoken interaction with a virtual agent (VA) that asked eight questions about the most recent experience of TLOC. Support Vector Machines (SVM) were trained using different combinations of features and nested leave-one-out cross validation. The iPEP provided a baseline performance. Inspired by previous qualitative research three spoken language based feature sets were designed to assess: (1) formulation effort, (2) the proportion of words from different semantic categories, and (3) verb, adverb, and adjective usage. Results76 participants completed the application (Epilepsy = 24, FDS = 36, syncope = 16). Only 61 participants also completed the VA interaction (Epilepsy = 20, FDS = 29, syncope = 12). The iPEP model accurately predicted 65.8 % of all diagnoses, but the inclusion of the language features increased the accuracy to 85.5 % by improving the differential diagnosis between epilepsy and FDS. ConclusionThese findings suggest that an automated analysis of TLOC descriptions collected using an online web application and VA could improve the accuracy of current clinical decisions tools for TLOC and facilitate clinical stratification processes (such as ensuring appropriate referral to cardiological versus neurological investigation and management pathways).

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call