Skip to main content

Table 3 Performance of Each Machine Learning Algorithm in the Independent Test Set of Patients*

From: Factors to improve odds of success following medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy: a machine learning analysis

 

XGBoost

Multi-Layer

Perception

Support Vector

Machine

Elastic Net

Logistic Regression

Random Forest

Accuracy

0.86 (0.84 to 0.87)

0.86 (0.85 to 0.87)

0.86 (0.86 to 0.87)

0.86 (0.86 to 0.87)

0.88 (0.87 to 0.89)

Sensitivity

0.16 (0.10 to 0.21)

0.0 (0.0 to 0.0)

0.0 (0.0 to 0.0)

0.11 (0.06 to 0.16)

0.17 (0.11 to 0.24)

Specificity

0.96 (0.95 to 0.98)

0.99 (0.99 to 1.0)

1.0 (1.0 to 1.0)

0.98 (0.97 to 0.99)

0.98 (0.98 to 0.99)

Precision

0.42 (0.27 to 0.58)

0.0 (0.0 to 0.0)

0.0 (0.0 to 0.0)

0.36 (0.21 to 0.51)

0.59 (0.41 to 0.77)

F1 Score

0.21 (0.14 to 0.28)

0.0 (0.0 to 0.0)

0.0 (0.0 to 0.0)

0.18 (0.10 to 0.26)

0.25 (0.17 to 0.33)

Brier Score

0.10 (0.09 to 0.11)

0.12 (0.11 to 0.12)

0.11 (0.11 to 0.11)

0.10 (0.09 to 0.11)

0.10 (0.09 to 0.10)

AUC

0.76 (0.73 to 0.80)

0.66 (0.60 to 0.73)

0.69 (0.64 to 0.74)

0.69 (0.63 to 0.75)

0.81 (0.77 to 0.85)

  1. *Values are presented as means and 95% confidence intervals