Table 2.
Comparative Analysis of Performance Results for Different Machine Learning Models
| Models | AUC | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | F1 Score | Brier Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RF | 0.83 | 0.72 | 0.74 | 0.70 | 0.72 | 0.72 | 0.73 | 0.176 |
| DT | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.68 | 0.66 | 0.68 | 0.346 |
| XGBoost | 0.80 | 0.73 | 0.76 | 0.70 | 0.72 | 0.73 | 0.74 | 0.211 |
| SVM | 0.75 | 0.68 | 0.75 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.70 | 0.71 | 0.205 |
| LR | 0.73 | 0.66 | 0.68 | 0.63 | 0.67 | 0.66 | 0.67 | 0.209 |
| LightGBM | 0.80 | 0.72 | 0.76 | 0.68 | 0.71 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.194 |
| MLP | 0.73 | 0.66 | 0.71 | 0.61 | 0.65 | 0.67 | 0.68 | 0.208 |
Abbreviations: RF, Random Forest; DT, Decision Tree; XGBoost, extreme gradient Boosting; SVM, Support Vector Machine; LR, Logistic Regression; LightGBM, light gradient boosting machine; MLP, Multilayer Perceptron; AUC, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.