Table 3.
Combination of evidence types* | Output level | Percentage %** | FP rate %*** |
---|---|---|---|
A and B and C and D and (E or F or G or H) | 1 | 33.6 | 0 |
A and B and C and (E or F or G or H) | 2 | 18.9 | 11.5 |
A and B and D and (E or F or G or H) | 3 | 19.6 | 10.7 |
A and B and (E or F or G or H) | 4 | 11.2 | 6.3 |
(A and C and D and (E or F or G or H)) or (A and H and I) | 5 | 3.5 | 0 |
A and C and (E or F or G or H) | 6 | 5.6 | 37.5 |
A and D and H | 7 | 0.7 | 100 |
A and H and (not J) | 8 | 7.7 | 81.9 |
The algorithm checks the combination of evidence types from top to bottom, produces an output level, and stops once it finds a match. The combination of evidence types and output levels were manually created based on the performance on the training data until the NLP algorithm achieved 100% sensitivity and specificity.
Percentages in NLP positive cases among the validation data.
False positive rate in the validation data by NLP output level.