Table 3 Training set performance of machine learning classifiers for prediction of wound outcome using all clinical and microbial metagenomic variables.

From: Metagenomic features of bioburden serve as outcome indicators in combat extremity wounds

Model

Probability threshold (%)

Median (%)

Mean (%)

q1 (%)

q3 (%)

Precision

rf

35.00

66.67

65.27

55.60

75.00

nnet

40.00

57.14

57.84

50.00

66.70

glmnet

45.00

60.00

59.85

50.00

66.70

svmRadial

20.00

66.67

64.45

50.00

75.00

Sensitivity

rf

35.00

83.33

80.15

71.40

90.00

nnet

40.00

75.00

73.82

62.50

85.70

glmnet

45.00

71.43

71.94

62.50

83.30

svmRadial

20.00

66.67

66.76

50.00

83.30

Specificity

rf

35.00

85.71

85.42

80.00

91.30

nnet

40.00

82.97

82.16

76.40

87.50

glmnet

45.00

84.62

83.93

78.90

90.00

svmRadial

20.00

88.24

86.58

81.20

95.00

  1. Four distinct machine learning classifiers (rf = random forest; nnet = neural network; glmnet = penalized logistic regression; svmRadial = support vector machine) were applied to the training data set after training on identical features. These features were composed of wound characteristics, antimicrobial resistance detection variables, and nosocomial pathogen sequence detection. Summary statistics for held-out boot632 estimates of performance metrics for model performance are shown for each classifier at their optimal threshold for distinguishing wound outcomes (i.e., classification at the threshold which maximizes Youden’s J).