Skip to main content
. 2017 May;38(5):1019–1025. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5106

Table 2:

Diagnostic performance of machine-learning classification in training and validation datasets

Tumor Type (Pathologic Diagnosis)
Diagnostic Performance
SCC IP
Model prediction for training dataset
    SCC 16 2 Accuracy 90.9%a
Sensitivity 94.1%
    IP 1 14 Specificity 87.5%
PPV 88.9%
    Total 17 16 NPV 93.3%
Model prediction for validation dataset
    SCC 6 1 Accuracy 84.6%a
Sensitivity 85.7%
    IP 1 5 Specificity 83.3%
PPV 85.7%
    Total 7 6 NPV 83.3%
Model prediction for entire cohort
    SCC 22 3 Accuracy 89.1%
Sensitivity 91.7%
    IP 2 19 Specificity 86.4%
PPV 88.0%
    Total 24 22 NPV 90.5%

Note:—NPV indicates negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value.

a

With a 2-tailed test of population proportion, the accuracies for the training and validation datasets were not significantly different (P = .537).