Skip to main content
. 2022 Oct 13;9:1009041. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.1009041

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Comparison of the AUROC values between the A2DS2-Nutrition and A2DS2 score. (A) In the training group, the A2DS2-Nutrition had a larger AUROC than the A2DS2 [0.820 (95% CI, 0.794–0.845) vs. 0.691 (95% CI, 0.660–0.722), P < 0.001]; (B) In the validation group, the AUROC of A2DS2-Nutrition was larger than the A2DS2 [0.864 (95% CI, 0.828–0.894) vs. 0.763 (95% CI, 0.720–0.801), P = 0.002].