The British Society of Breast Radiology BSBRR) Interval Classifications are as follows: 0 = unclassifiable, 1 = normal/benign, 2 = uncertain and 3 = suspicious.
Equal intervals classification was found not to be useful for its emphasis on the amount of one class value relative to other classes.
Socioeconomic status (SES) at age 32 was determined using standard NZ indices which apply a six-interval classification according to occupation; for example, a doctor scores 1 and a labourer scores 6 [ 32, 33].
However, a range of intermediate ferret SAR values yielded equivocal results (i.e. the 95% confidence interval for classification included a classification probability of 0.5).
At each interval the classification accuracy was measured.
Of these 52 were assigned a 2 or 3 interval cancer classification.
Following multidisciplinary review of both clinical and imaging investigations, a final symptomatic interval cancer classification was ascribed.
These results are reassuring that digital diagnoses similar cancers to analogue screening, and suggest that digital may allow more definitive interval cancer classification.
Among the 25 annotated genes within this interval, functional classification identified ppa007577m and ppa008301m as the most likely candidates, both encoding transcription factors of the NAC (NAM/ ATAF1, 2/ CUC2) family.
Freire and Almeida (2001) suggested value intervals for classification:.80-.90 .80-.90ood;.70-.80, respectable;.65-.70, acceptable;.60-.65, undesirable; below.60, unacceptable.
