Table 2.
Total accuracy % | Balanced accuracy % | Balanced accuracy P value | Class accuracy % |
Class accuracy P value |
Class predictive value % |
ROC | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | |||||
Jacobian | 83.19 | 63.33 | 0.01 | 31.82 | 94.85 | 0.01 | 0.82 | 58.33 | 85.98 | 0.79 |
GM | 84.87 | 74.36 | 0.01 | 31.82 | 96.91 | 0.01 | 0.07 | 70 | 86.24 | 0.79 |
WM | 79.83 | 52.48 | 0.1 | 9.09 | 95.88 | 0.24 | 0.12 | 33.33 | 82.3 | 0.62 |
WMH | 79.83 | 54.24 | 0.01 | 13.64 | 94.85 | 0.01 | 0.95 | 37.5 | 82.88 | 0.65 |
Lacunar | 84.03 | 56.82 | 0.01 | 13.64 | 100 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 100 | 83.62 | 0.64 |
Cortical Thickness | 79.83 | 57.76 | 0.01 | 22.73 | 92.78 | 0.02 | 0.52 | 41.67 | 84.11 | 0.71 |
Putamen | 82.35 | 68.09 | 0.01 | 45.45 | 90.72 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 52.63 | 88 | 0.78 |
Caudate | 78.99 | 60.75 | 0.01 | 31.82 | 89.69 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 41.18 | 85.29 | 0.73 |
Striatum (Putamen + Caudate) | 80.67 | 65.3 | 0.01 | 40.91 | 89.69 | 0.01 | 0.15 | 47.37 | 87 | 0.77 |
Hippocampus | 83.19 | 65.09 | 0.01 | 36.36 | 93.81 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 57.14 | 86.87 | 0.8 |
Thalamus | 80.67 | 61.79 | 0.01 | 31.82 | 91.75 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 46.67 | 85.58 | 0.72 |
Putamen + Hippocampus | 84.87 | 69.93 | 0.01 | 45.45 | 93.81 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 62.5 | 88.35 | 0.84 |
Striatum + Hippocampus | 84.87 | 73.17 | 0.01 | 54.55 | 91.75 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 60 | 89.9 | 0.84 |
Putamen + Hippocampus + Thalamus | 83.19 | 70.36 | 0.01 | 50 | 90.72 | 0.01 | 0.15 | 55 | 88.89 | 0.81 |
Striatum + Hippocampus + Thalamus | 82.35 | 66.33 | 0.01 | 40.91 | 91.75 | 0.01 | 0.15 | 52.94 | 87.25 | 0.81 |
The masked analysis used subcortical ROIs and the Jacobian determinant data. The best prediction (judged by balanced accuracy) was achieved using the combined striatum-hippocampus mask, which was significant at P < 0.01 using permutation testing (10,000 permutations)