Table 2.

Comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and number of misclassified cases relative to the expert reading using the CART model or an algorithmic-based approach to diagnosis.

	CART model			Algorithm-based approach
	Sensitivity	Specificity	Misclassified cases N (%)	Sensitivity	Specificity	Misclassified cases N (%)
Achalasia type I	92.9%	99.8%	1 (7.1)	71.4%	100.0%	4 (28.6)
Achalasia type II	94.9%	100.0%	2 (5.1)	84.6%	100.0%	6 (15.4)
Achalasia type III	88.9%	99.8%	2 (11.1)	94.4%	99.8%	1 (5.6)
EGJ outflow obstruction	96.4%	99.8%	2 (3.6)	98.2%	98.7%	1 (1.8)
Distal esophageal spasm	100.0%	99.8%	0 (0)	100%	99.8%	0 (0)
Absent peristalsis	96.4%	100.0%	1 (3.6)	96.4%	99.2%	1 (3.6)
Hypercontractile esophagus	95.2%	99.6%	1 (4.8)	90.5%	100%	2 (9.5)
Borderline motor function†	93.3%	97.0%	15 (6.7)	92.4%	97.0%	17 (7.6)
Normal	95.5%	96.6%	5 (4.5)	95.5%	96.1%	5 (4.5)

^†Encompasses rapid contractions with normal latency, hypertensive peristalsis, weak peristalsis with large or small peristaltic defects, and frequent failed peristalsis