{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,21]],"date-time":"2025-10-21T15:26:25Z","timestamp":1761060385308,"version":"3.41.2"},"reference-count":13,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","issue":"1078","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]],"date-time":"2017-09-08T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1504828800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/journals\/pages\/open_access\/funder_policies\/chorus\/standard_publication_model"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2017,10,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT<\/jats:title>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Objective:<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Measures of percent mammographic density (PMD) are often categorized using various density scales. The purpose of this study was to examine information loss associated with the use of categorical density scales.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Methods:<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Baseline PMD was assessed at 1% precision for 2,374 females. The data were used to create 21-category, 4-category and 2-category density scales. R-squared and root mean square error were used to evaluate the effect of categorizing PMD. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curves were compared between cancer risk models employing solely categorical PMD scales and solely baseline PMD for a subset of females (424 cases, 848 controls).<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Results:<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>R-squared value decreased from 1.00 (1% PMD) to 0.56 (2-category scale), while root mean square error increased from 0.00 (1% PMD) to 10.83 (2-category scale). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve decreased from 0.64 for a cancer risk model using 1% PMD to 0.58 for a risk model using a 21-category density scale (p &amp;lt; 0.0001), 0.55 for a 4-category Breast Imaging, Reporting and Data System-like scale (p &amp;lt; 0.0001) and 0.50 for a 2-category Breast Imaging, Reporting and Data System-like scale (high vs low) (p &amp;lt; 0.0001).<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Conclusion:<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Categorizing PMD measures into categorical density scales leads to a significant loss of information. Indeed, a simple high versus low split of PMD using a 50% cut point yields a cancer risk model with no discriminatory power.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Advances in knowledge:<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Use of categorical mammographic density scales rather than continuous percent mammographic density measures leads to significant loss of information. Breast cancer risk models using categorical mammographic density scales perform more poorly than models using continuous PMD measures.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1259\/bjr.20170307","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,7,14]],"date-time":"2017-07-14T13:15:56Z","timestamp":1500038156000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":6,"title":["Breast density scales: the metric matters"],"prefix":"10.1093","volume":"90","author":[{"given":"Mohamed","family":"Abdolell","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Nova Scotia Health Authority , Halifax , NS, Canada"},{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Dalhousie University, Faculty of Medicine , Halifax , NS, Canada"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Kaitlyn M","family":"Tsuruda","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Nova Scotia Health Authority , Halifax , NS, Canada"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Peter","family":"Brown","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Nova Scotia Health Authority , Halifax , NS, Canada"},{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Dalhousie University, Faculty of Medicine , Halifax , NS, Canada"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Judy S","family":"Caines","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Nova Scotia Health Authority , Halifax , NS, Canada"},{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Dalhousie University, Faculty of Medicine , Halifax , NS, Canada"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sian E","family":"Iles","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Nova Scotia Health Authority , Halifax , NS, Canada"},{"name":"Nova Scotia Breast Screening Program, IWK Health Centre , Halifax , NS, Canada"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"reference":[{"key":"2024050213483085800_b1","volume-title":"Breast imaging reporting and data system: ACR BI-RADS\u2014breast imaging atlas","author":"D\u2019Orsi","year":"2003","edition":"4th ed"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1215","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djj332","article-title":"Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density","volume":"98","author":"Chen","year":"2006","journal-title":"J JNCI Nat Cancer Ins"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"337","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-148-5-200803040-00004","article-title":"Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model","volume":"148","author":"Tice","year":"2008","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"889","DOI":"10.1158\/1055-9965.EPI-15-0035","article-title":"One versus two breast density measures to predict 5- and 10-Year breast cancer risk","volume":"24","author":"Kerlikowske","year":"2015","journal-title":"Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"147","DOI":"10.1186\/s13058-015-0653-5","article-title":"Mammographic density adds accuracy to both the Tyrer-Cuzick and gail breast cancer risk models in a prospective UK screening cohort","volume":"17","author":"Brentnall","year":"2015","journal-title":"Breast Cancer Res"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.332.7549.1080","article-title":"The cost of dichotomising continuous variables","volume":"332","author":"Altman","year":"2006","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"249","DOI":"10.1177\/014662168300700301","article-title":"The cost of dichotomization","volume":"7","author":"Cohen","year":"1983","journal-title":"Appl Psychol Meas"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1159","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.1687","article-title":"Inflation of the type I error rate when a continuous confounding variable is categorized in logistic regression analyses","volume":"23","author":"Austin","year":"2004","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"21","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-12-21","article-title":"Against quantiles: categorization of continuous variables in epidemiologic research, and its discontents","volume":"12","author":"Bennette","year":"2012","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"20150522","DOI":"10.1259\/bjr.20150522","article-title":"Utility of relative and absolute measures of mammographic density vs clinical risk factors in evaluating breast cancer risk at time of screening mammography","volume":"89","author":"Abdolell","year":"2016","journal-title":"Br J Radiol"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"837","DOI":"10.2307\/2531595","article-title":"Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach","volume":"44","author":"DeLong","year":"1988","journal-title":"Biometrics"},{"key":"2024050213483085800_b12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"121","DOI":"10.1007\/s10549-007-9581-0","article-title":"Reproducibility of visual assessment on mammographic density","volume":"108","author":"Gao","year":"2008","journal-title":"Breast Cancer Res Treat"},{"first-page":"86730T","year":"2013","author":"Sergeant","key":"2024050213483085800_b13"}],"container-title":["The British Journal of Radiology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/bjr\/article-pdf\/90\/1078\/20170307\/57382341\/bjr.20170307.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/bjr\/article-pdf\/90\/1078\/20170307\/57382341\/bjr.20170307.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,2]],"date-time":"2024-05-02T13:52:01Z","timestamp":1714657921000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/bjr\/article\/doi\/10.1259\/bjr.20170307\/7476120"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"references-count":13,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1078","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2017,10,1]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1259\/bjr.20170307","relation":{},"ISSN":["0007-1285","1748-880X"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0007-1285"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1748-880X"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2017,10,1]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"article-number":"20170307"}}