Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34307865›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2021

The coefficient of determination R-squared is more informative than SMAPE, MAE, MAPE, MSE and RMSE in regression analysis evaluation.

Davide Chicco, Matthijs J Warrens, Giuseppe Jurman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 541 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
541citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

541 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mapping the modified rankin scale (mRS) onto the assessment of quality of life (AQoL) utilities.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Machine learning-assisted osteoporosis detection using radiographic canal bone ratio (CBR-7) and demographic features.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

481 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Davide ChiccoInstitute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9655-7142
Matthijs J WarrensGroningen Institute for Educational Research, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7302-640X
Giuseppe JurmanData Science for Health Unit, Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2705-5728

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regression analysis makes up a large part of supervised machine learning, and consists of the prediction of a continuous independent target from a set of other predictor variables. The difference between binary classification and regression is in the target range: in binary classification, the target can have only two values (usually encoded as 0 and 1), while in regression the target can have multiple values. Even if regression analysis has been employed in a huge number of machine learning studies, no consensus has been reached on a single, unified, standard metric to assess the results of the regression itself. Many studies employ the mean square error (MSE) and its rooted variant (RMSE), or the mean absolute error (MAE) and its percentage variant (MAPE). Although useful, these rates share a common drawback: since their values can range between zero and +infinity, a single value of them does not say much about the performance of the regression with respect to the distribution of the ground truth elements. In this study, we focus on two rates that actually generate a high score only if the majority of the elements of a ground truth group has been correctly predicted: the coefficient of determination (also known as

Indexed as

Coefficient of determinationMean absolute errorMean square errorRegressionRegression analysisRegression evaluationRegression evaluation rates

Identifiers

PMID34307865
PMCPMC8279135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.