Table 2.

Experimental result using the multiclass 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])
Multi-class CMB	SWI	0.82 ± 0.07 CI [0.68, 0.96]	0.36 ± 0.06 CI [0.24, 0.49]	0.99 ± 0.06 CI [0.87, 1.12]	0.96 (p = 0.000)	md = 0.04 CI [− 26.61, 26.70]
	SWI and QSM	0.84 ± 0.07 CI [0.70, 0.98]	0.59 ± 0.08 CI [0.43, 0.75]	1.15 ± 0.07 CI [1.00, 1.29]	0.99 (p = 0.000)	md = 0.67 CI [− 18.26, 19.59]
	SWI and T2w	0.76 ± 0.08 CI [0.60, 0.91]	0.43 ± 0.06 CI [0.31, 0.56]	1.00 ± 0.07 CI [0.86, 1.13]	0.97 (p = 0.000)	md = 0.75 CI [− 25.47, 26.97]
	SWI, QSM and T2w	0.89 ± 0.05 CI [0.79, 1.00]	0.49 ± 0.06 CI [0.37, 0.61]	1.07 ± 0.06 CI [0.95, 1.19]	0.98 (p = 0.000)	md = 0.92 CI [− 25.49, 27.33]
Multi-class iron deposits	SWI	0.76 ± 0.06 CI [0.63, 0.88]	0.70 ± 0.08 CI [0.55, 0.86]	1.13 ± 0.07 CI [0.99, 1.28]	0.91 (p = 0.000)	md = 13.83 CI [− 62.08, 89.75]
	SWI and QSM	0.75 ± 0.07 CI [0.62, 0.88]	0.75 ± 0.08 CI [0.60, 0.91]	1.20 ± 0.05 CI [1.11, 1.30]	0.91 (p = 0.000)	md = 6.71 CI [− 74.77, 88.18]
	SWI and T2w	0.76 ± 0.06 CI [0.64, 0.89]	0.60 ± 0.08 CI [0.44, 0.75]	1.08 ± 0.07 CI [0.93, 1.22]	0.87 (p = 0.000)	md = 18.29 CI [− 71.54, 108.12]
	SWI, QSM and T2w	0.81 ± 0.05 CI [0.71, 0.92]	0.64 ± 0.08 CI [0.49, 0.79]	1.17 ± 0.05 CI [1.08, 1.27]	0.90 (p = 0.000)	md = 16.29 CI [− 62.23, 94.82]

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

Bold—Model with highest magnitude accuracy.