Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neuroimage. 2019 Dec 9;208:116450. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116450

Table 2.

Results of evaluation of goodness of fit with GAM versus linear and quadratic models on single-site data.

Number (%) of ROIs in which GAM achieved superior goodness of fit based on adjusted R-Square Number (%) of ROIs in which GAM achieved superior goodness of fit based on out-of-sample RMSE* in split-sample validation
Dataset GAM versus Linear GAM versus Quadratic GAM versus Linear GAM versus Quadratic
PNC (n=1,444) 124 (85.5%) 101 (69.7) 105 (72.4%) 72 (49.7%)
SHIP (n=2,738) 123 (84.8%) 116 (80%) 103 (71.0%) 76 (52.4%)
BLSA-3T (n=964) 126 (86.9%) 128 (88.3%) 109 (75.2%) 74 (51.0%)
*

RMSE: Root Mean Square Error