Table 1.

Experimental results using the single class model for the number of predicted CMB and iron deposit lesions evaluated against the reference annotation.

	Experiments	Avg. sensitivity ± SEM [CI lower, upper]	Avg. precision ± SEM [CI lower, upper]	Avg. magnitude accuracy ± SEM [CI lower, upper]	Pearson correlation Coeff. (p-value)	Bland–Altman plot (md, [lower, upper])
Single class CMB	SWI	0.85 ± 0.06 CI [0.74, 0.97]	0.22 ± 0.04 CI [0.14, 0.31]	0.91 ± 0.06 CI [0.80, 1.03]	0.96 (p = 0.000)	md = − 4.54 CI [− 24.77, 15.69]
	SWI and QSM	0.88 ± 0.06 CI [0.77, 0.99]	0.40 ± 0.07 CI [0.27, 0.54]	1.09 ± 0.04 CI [1.00, 1.17]	0.97 (p = 0.000)	md = − 2.21 CI [− 19.45, 15.04]
	SWI and T2w	0.84 ± 0.07 CI [0.70, 0.97]	0.29 ± 0.06 CI [0.17, 0.42]	0.95 ± 0.08 CI [0.80, 1.10]	0.76 (p = 0.000)	md = − 3.04 CI [− 36.59, 30.51]
	SWI, QSM and T2w	0.87 ± 0.06 CI [0.76, 0.98]	0.50 ± 0.07 CI [0.35, 0.64]	1.08 ± 0.07 CI [0.94, 1.22]	0.98 (p = 0.000)	md = − 0.71 CI [− 15.26, 13.84]
Single class iron deposits	SWI	0.81 ± 0.06 CI [0.68, 0.94]	0.51 ± 0.07 CI [0.37, 0.65]	1.06 ± 0.08 CI [0.91, 1.21]	0.88 (p = 0.000)	md = − 4.08 CI [− 102.63, 94.46]
	SWI and QSM	0.77 ± 0.06 CI [0.65, 0.89]	0.60 ± 0.07 CI [0.46, 0.75]	1.09 ± 0.05 CI [0.99, 1.20]	0.92 (p = 0.000)	md = − 2.54 CI [− 80.42, 75.34]
	SWI and T2w	0.77 ± 0.06 CI [0.64, 0.89]	0.56 ± 0.07 CI [0.42, 0.70]	1.04 ± 0.08 CI [0.88, 1.19]	0.85 (p = 0.000)	md = 9.04 CI [− 91.48, 109.56]
	SWI, QSM and T2w	0.81 ± 0.05 CI [0.71, 0.92]	0.62 ± 0.07 CI [0.47, 0.76]	1.11 ± 0.05 CI [1.02, 1.21]	0.81 (p = 0.000)	md = 2.58 CI [− 114.33, 119.50]

SEM standard error of the mean, md mean difference, CI confidence interval.

Bold—Model with highest magnitude accuracy.