Table 2.
Detailed diagnostic performance of the three models in the training and testing cohorts.
| Semantic model | Texture model | Combined model | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training cohort | Testing cohort | Training cohort | Testing cohort | Training cohort | Testing cohort | |
| Sensitivity | 84.6% (95%CI: 78.1%–91.2%) | 65.5% (95%CI: 48.2%–82.3%) | 78.6% (95%CI: 71.2%–86.0%) | 82.8% (95%CI: 69.0%–96.5%) | 79.5% (95%CI: 72.2–86.8%) | 79.3% (95%CI: 64.6%–94.1%) |
|
| ||||||
| Specificity | 71.2% (95%CI:62.4%–79.9%) | 88.4% (95%CI: 76.2%-1) | 75.0% (95%CI: 66.7%–83.3%) | 92.3% (95%CI: 82.1%-1) | 78.8% (95%CI: 71.0%–86.7%) | 92.3% (95%CI: 82.1%-1) |
|
| ||||||
| PPV (%) | 76.7% (95%CI:69.5%–84.0%) | 86.4% (95%CI: 72.0%-1) | 78.0% (95%CI: 70.5%–85.4%) | 92.3% (95%CI: 82.1%-1) | 80.9% (95%CI: 73.7%–88.1%) | 92.0% (95%CI: 81.3%-1) |
|
| ||||||
| NPV (%) | 80.4% (95%CI:72.3%–88.5%) | 69.7% (95%CI: 54.0%–85.4%) | 75.7% (95%CI: 67.4%–84.0%) | 82.8% (95%CI: 69.0%–96.5%) | 77.4% (95%CI: 69.4%–85.3%) | 80.0% (65.7%–94.3%) |