“…It can be seen from the table that the accuracy, specificity and AUC of the proposed method are all higher than those of the other listed methods, reaching 96.83, 98.97 and 0.9830%, respectively. In terms of accuracy, the second highest comparison reaches 96.36% in [23], which is still 0.47% lower than that of the proposed method, and its other three indexes are 2.64, 0.21, 0.0058% lower than that of the proposed method, respectively; in terms of sensitivity, the highest comparison reaches 80.78% in [24], which is 0.12% higher than that of the proposed method, but its accuracy and specificity are 2.14 and 2.23% lower than that of the proposed method, respectively; in terms of specificity, the second highest comparison reaches 98.94% in [25], which is just 0.03% lower than that of the proposed method, and its accuracy and sensitivity are 1.81 and 6.56% lower than that of the proposed method, respectively; in terms of AUC, the second highest comparison reaches 0.9800 in [26], which is 0.0030 lower than that of the proposed method, and its other three indexes are 1.27, 0.3 and 1.19% lower than that of the proposed method, respectively.…”