ArticleBioData mining2023
The Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) should replace the ROC AUC as the standard metric for assessing binary classification.
Article in BioData mining, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 197 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
197 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- AI-driven techniques for detection and mitigation of SARS-CoV-2 spread: a review, taxonomy, and trends.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Decoding IBS: a machine learning approach to psychological distress and gut-brain interaction.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Trial
- Benchmarking supervised classifiers within a design-of-experiments framework: Robust statistical inference in text mining.MethodsX · 2026Article
- Radiomics and machine learning for differentiating pediatric intramedullary spinal tumors: a pilot study.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- An accessible property classification framework to predict the solubility of functionalised naphthalenes and rylenes in organic solvents.Digital discovery · 2026Article
- Genolator enables protein function interpretation using a multimodal large language model fusing genomic and structural interpretation with natural language interaction.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Data-Driven Critical Evaluation of the General Solubility Equation.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- scXpand: Pan-cancer detection of T cell clonal expansion from single-cell RNA sequencing without paired single-cell TCR sequencing.Cell genomics · 2026Article
- Lipidomic Profile Reconstruction of Therapeutic Membrane Targets Using Physics-Based Optimization with Limited Activity Data.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic determinants of malaria in Ugandan children: An interpretable machine learning approach for public health policy.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Exploratory immunomonitoring during radiochemotherapy in HNSCC and machine-learning reveal immune parameters associated with disease-free survival.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Detection of Myopia from Colour Fundus Photographs Using YOLO-Based Computer-Vision Models: A Comparison with Expert Ophthalmologists.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- PathMED: an R toolkit for single-sample molecular scoring and machine learning with omics data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- High-resolution promoter interaction analysis implicates genes involved in activation of type 3 innate lymphoid cells in immune disease risk.Nature genetics · 2026Article
- Manual federated simulation for multiple sclerosis integrating XGBoost algorithm with SHAP explanation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Context-Aware Multilevel Classification of Semantic Relations in Drug-Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) Networks-Predicting Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) as a Case Study.Chemical research in toxicology · 2026Article
- Biomarkers in Clinical Medicine Research: A Literature Survey in the PubMed Database and a Critical Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Detection of early-stage Parkinson's disease using wearable sensors at multiple body locations and convolutional neural networks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A generalizable computational framework for integrating heterogeneous biomarkers into interpretable scalar risk representations.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- ProteoForge: An Imputation-Aware Framework for Differential Proteoform Discovery in Bottom-Up Proteomics.Journal of proteome research · 2026Article
137 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Binary classification is a common task for which machine learning and computational statistics are used, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC) has become the common standard metric to evaluate binary classifications in most scientific fields. The ROC curve has true positive rate (also called sensitivity or recall) on the y axis and false positive rate on the x axis, and the ROC AUC can range from 0 (worst result) to 1 (perfect result). The ROC AUC, however, has several flaws and drawbacks. This score is generated including predictions that obtained insufficient sensitivity and specificity, and moreover it does not say anything about positive predictive value (also known as precision) nor negative predictive value (NPV) obtained by the classifier, therefore potentially generating inflated overoptimistic results. Since it is common to include ROC AUC alone without precision and negative predictive value, a researcher might erroneously conclude that their classification was successful. Furthermore, a given point in the ROC space does not identify a single confusion matrix nor a group of matrices sharing the same MCC value. Indeed, a given (sensitivity, specificity) pair can cover a broad MCC range, which casts doubts on the reliability of ROC AUC as a performance measure. In contrast, the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) generates a high score in its [Formula: see text] interval only if the classifier scored a high value for all the four basic rates of the confusion matrix: sensitivity, specificity, precision, and negative predictive value. A high MCC (for example, MCC [Formula: see text] 0.9), moreover, always corresponds to a high ROC AUC, and not vice versa. In this short study, we explain why the Matthews correlation coefficient should replace the ROC AUC as standard statistic in all the scientific studies involving a binary classification, in all scientific fields.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.