ArticleEuropean radiology2025
User requirements for quantitative radiological reports in multiple sclerosis.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesQuantitative radiological reports (QReports) can enhance clinical management of multiple sclerosis (MS) by including quantitative data from MRI scans. However, the lack of consensus on the specific information to include, on and clinicians' preferences, hinders the adoption of these imaging analysis tools. This study aims to facilitate the clinical implementation of QReports by determining clinicians' requirements regarding their use in MS management. MATERIALS AND
methodsA four-phase Delphi panel approach was employed, involving neurologists and (neuro)radiologists across Europe. Initial interviews with experts helped develop a questionnaire addressing various QReport aspects. This questionnaire underwent refinement based on feedback and was distributed through the MAGNIMS network. A second questionnaire, incorporating additional questions, was circulated following a plenary discussion at the MAGNIMS workshop in Milan in November 2023. Responses from both questionnaire iterations were collected and analyzed, with adjustments made based on participant feedback.
resultsThe study achieved a 49.6% response rate, involving 78 respondents. Key preferences and barriers to QReport adoption were identified, highlighting the importance of integration into clinical workflows, cost-effectiveness, educational support for interpretation, and validation standards. Strong consensus emerged on including detailed lesion information and specific brain and spinal cord volume measurements. Concerns regarding report generation time, data protection, and reliability were also raised.
conclusionWhile QReports show potential for improving MS management, incorporation of the key metrics and addressing the identified barriers related to cost, validation, integration, and clinician education is crucial for practical implementation. These recommendations for developers to refine QReports could enhance their utility and adoption in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: Question A lack of consensus on essential features for quantitative magnetic resonance imaging reports limits their integration into multiple sclerosis management. Findings This study identified key preferences, including detailed lesion information, specific brain and spinal cord measurements, and rigorous validation for effective quantitative reports. Clinical relevance This study identified essential features and barriers for implementing quantitative radiological reports in multiple sclerosis management, aiming to enhance clinical workflows, improve disease monitoring, and ultimately provide better, data-driven care for patients through tailored imaging solutions.
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.