Table 3.

Performance of rHVPG in diagnosing clinically significant portal hypertension in cirrhosis in the training and validation cohorts.

	Training cohort (n = 222)	Validation cohort 1 (n = 105)	Validation cohort 2 (n = 26)	Validation cohort 3 (n = 16)	Validation cohort 4 (n = 16)
AUC (95%CI)	0·849 (0·786–0·911)	0·889 (0·752–1·000)	0·800 (0·614–0·986)	0·917 (0·772–1·000)	0·827 (0·618–1·000)
Sensitivity (95%CI)	0·787 (0·732–0·847)	0·693 (0·584–0·762)	0·857 (0·714–1·000)	0·833 (0·583–1·000)	0·636 (0·364–0·909)
Specificity (95%CI)	0·769 (0·641–0·897)	1·000 (1·000–1·000)	0·800 (0·400–1·000)	1·000 (1·000–1·000)	1·000 (1·000–1·000)
PPV (95%CI)	0·941 (0·911–0·973)	1·000 (1·000–1·000)	0·947 (0·857–1·000)	1·000 (1·000–1·000)	1·000 (1·000–1·000)
NPV (95%CI)	0·435 (0·363–0·517)	0·114 (0·087–0·143)	0·571 (0·333–1·000)	0·667 (0·444–1·000)	0·556 (0·417–0·833)

rHVPG, radiomics-based hepatic venous pressure gradient; AUC, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.