ArticleEuropean radiology2026
VI-RADS quality score: development and proposal of a scoring system by the American College of Radiology VI-RADS Steering Committee.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Stalk Sign in Bladder Cancer: CEUS Versus MRI.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Current Status and Future Perspective for Bladder Cancer MR Imaging and the Vesical Imaging-Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) in Japan: Challenges and Solutions.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026Review
- Toward a standardized and interoperable imaging biomarker catalog.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- What's next for VI-RADS? Updates and future perspectives from the ACR VI-RADS steering committee.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Review
- Article
- Evaluating extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: pragmatic integration of MRI and PSMA-PET/CT.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-quality bladder MRI is essential for reliable detection and characterization of bladder tumors. While the Vesical Imaging Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) was developed to standardize acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of MRI for bladder cancer staging, no universal scoring system has been established for quality assessment. A systematic review showed that existing efforts for bladder MRI quality assessment have largely relied on study-specific, subjective Likert-type scales, with substantial variability, hindering reproducibility and comparability across studies and institutions. In this paper, we describe a novel bladder MRI scoring system that was developed by the multidisciplinary American College of Radiology VI-RADS Steering Committee, the VI-RADS Quality Score. It provides stratification of quality scores-inadequate, adequate, and optimal-based on signal-to-noise ratio, ability to clearly visualize relevant anatomic landmarks, and assessments of common imaging artifacts, which can guide clinical decision-making. It also emphasizes per-sequence scores in addition to an overall assessment to support targeted MRI protocol optimization. The VI-RADS Quality Score will need to be prospectively validated and will facilitate reproducibility across institutions, build trust in bladder MRI within multidisciplinary teams, and accelerate widespread adoption of bladder MRI for bladder cancer imaging. KEY POINTS: Question While high-quality bladder MRI is essential for evaluating bladder cancer, no universal scoring system is established for quality assessment. Findings A systematic review showed that studies on bladder MRI quality had significant variability. A structured scoring system was developed by the multidisciplinary VI-RADS steering committee. Clinical relevance High-quality bladder MRI is essential for reliable evaluation of bladder cancer. The VI-RADS Steering Committee developed a scoring system for bladder MRI quality assessment. This is expected to facilitate reproducibility and build trust in bladder MRI within multidisciplinary teams.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40830701What 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.