> All models were trained on 70% of the data and tested on the remaining 30% of the data. Note that each month record for each participant was considered an independent data point.
I'm almost certain that this is a mining leak.
Data from one patient will end up both in the training and test set and result in fantastic accuracy. Of course it will be from different months. The correct way to do this is to cross-validate/split across the population. It seems unlikely, from this description, that the authors have done so.
> All models were trained on 70% of the data and tested on the remaining 30% of the data. Note that each month record for each participant was considered an independent data point.
I'm almost certain that this is a mining leak.
Data from one patient will end up both in the training and test set and result in fantastic accuracy. Of course it will be from different months. The correct way to do this is to cross-validate/split across the population. It seems unlikely, from this description, that the authors have done so.
[1] https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13195-021...