ArticlePloS one2024
Predicting successful draft outcome in Australian Rules football: Model sensitivity is superior in neural networks when compared to logistic regression.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Role of Machine Learning in Talent Identification for Team Sports: A Systematic Review.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Associations between domain-specific physical activity, sedentary behavior, and binge drinking among adults in the United States and China: evidence from a cross-sectional study, daily tracking, and randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2025Trial
- Machine learning applications in sport: a scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Evaluating non-linear thresholds and synergistic interactions in the comorbidity of preoperative insomnia and emergence agitation: a SHAP-based machine learning study.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Robustness of CNN-augmented sequential models for Li-ion battery RUL prediction under data scarcity.PloS one · 2025Article
- Integration of machine learning XGBoost and SHAP models for NBA game outcome prediction and quantitative analysis methodology.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Using logistic regression and neural networks, the aim of this study was to compare model performance when predicting player draft outcome during the 2021 AFL National Draft. Physical testing, in-game movement and technical involvements were collected from 708 elite-junior Australian Rules football players during consecutive seasons. Predictive models were generated using data from 465 players (2017 to 2020). Data from 243 players were then used to prospectively predict the 2021 AFL National Draft. Logistic regression and neural network models were compared for specificity, sensitivity and accuracy using relative cut-off thresholds from 5% to 50%. Using factored and unfactored data, and a range of relative cut-off thresholds, neural networks accounted for 73% of the 40 best performing models across positional groups and data configurations. Neural networks correctly classified more drafted players than logistic regression in 88% of cases at draft rate (15%) and convergence threshold (35%). Using individual variables across thresholds, neural networks (specificity = 79 ± 13%, sensitivity = 61 ± 24%, accuracy = 76 ± 8%) were consistently superior to logistic regression (specificity = 73 ± 15%, sensitivity = 29 ± 14%, accuracy = 66 ± 11%). Where the goal is to identify talented players with draft potential, model sensitivity is paramount, and neural networks were superior to logistic regression.
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.