. 2025 Aug 14;9:e64536. doi: 10.2196/64536

Table 6.

Comparison between the baseline approach and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index–based processing approach, and the improvement rate from baseline for each model.

Model			Baseline							WOMAC^a-based processing approach							Improvement rate
Model			F₁-score (%)		Macro avg^b (%)		Weighted avg^c (%)		F₁-score (%)			Macro avg^b (%)		Weighted avg^c (%)		F₁-score (%)			Macro avg^b (%)		Weighted avg^c (%)
Word_Tokenize
	BiLSTM^d	0.89		0.88		0.89		0.92			0.90		0.90		0.03			0.02		0.01
	GRU^e	0.88		0.85		0.86		0.90			0.88		0.88		0.02			0.03		0.02
	CNN^f	0.89		0.86		0.87		0.92			0.90		0.90		0.03			0.04		0.03
DeepCut
	BiLSTM	0.89		0.85		0.86		0.91			0.88		0.89		0.02			0.03		0.03
	GRU	0.88		0.84		0.85		0.91			0.89		0.89		0.03			0.04		0.04
	CNN	0.89		0.85		0.86		0.91			0.89		0.90		0.02			0.04		0.04
AttaCut
	BiLSTM	0.90		0.86		0.87		0.93			0.91		0.91		0.03			0.05		0.04
	GRU	0.89		0.86		0.86		0.91			0.88		0.89		0.02			0.02		0.03
	CNN	0.89		0.86		0.87		0.92			0.88		0.89		0.03			0.02		0.02

^aAUC: area under the curve.

^bMAE: mean absolute error.

^cNot applicable.