Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Psychiatry. Apr 19, 2026; 16(4): 116428
Published online Apr 19, 2026. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v16.i4.116428
Published online Apr 19, 2026. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v16.i4.116428
Table 4 Statistical comparison between multimodal and bimodal extreme gradient boosting models
| Multimodal | Bimodal | t value | P value | Cohen’s d | Effect size | |
| AUC-ROC | 0.99 ± 0.01 | 0.96 ± 0.04 | 4.52 | 0.00 | 1.17 | Large |
| AUC-PR | 0.99 ± 0.00 | 0.98 ± 0.03 | 3.87 | 0.00 | 1.04 | Large |
| Accuracy | 0.95 ± 0.03 | 0.93 ± 0.03 | 2.95 | 0.01 | 0.76 | Moderate-to-large |
| Precision | 0.96 ± 0.03 | 0.94 ± 0.04 | 2.18 | 0.03 | 0.56 | Moderate |
| Recall | 0.97 ± 0.02 | 0.96 ± 0.03 | 1.51 | 0.14 | 0.39 | Small-to-moderate |
| F1 score | 0.97 ± 0.02 | 0.95 ± 0.02 | 2.95 | 0.01 | 0.74 | Moderate-to-large |
- Citation: Zeng Y, Yang J, Kuang L. Bridging the gap between subjective and objective measures: A multimodal protocol for adolescent depression detection. World J Psychiatry 2026; 16(4): 116428
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v16/i4/116428.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v16.i4.116428