ArticleThe British journal of radiology2026
Prostate MRI in the United Kingdom: a survey of current practice by the British Society of Urogenital Radiology.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2026. 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.
- Integrating MRI-based tumour staging within the TNM classification system in modern prostate cancer management.Insights into imaging · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo characterize contemporary UK practice in prostate MRI reporting and pathways, and identify priorities for standardization.
methodsBetween February and April 2025, a questionnaire was distributed by the British Society of Urogenital Radiology to UK-based consultant radiologists who report prostate MRI. It contained 34 questions, covering 6 domains: demographics; MRI protocols; biopsy; reporting preferences; imaging pathways; and attitudes towards accreditation.
resultsSeventy-seven radiologists representing 52 NHS Trusts across all nations of the UK responded. Key findings include variable patient preparation for MRI including anti-spasmodic medication (69.2% administering) and instruction related to bowel preparation (13.5%). Trusts (100) were performing MRI prior to biopsy for suspected cancer; 73.1% using multiparametric MRI. When reporting prostate MRI for suspected cancer, 28.6% document only a PI-RADS score, 27.3% only a Likert score, with 44.1% stating both. The PI-QUAL score is moderately well known (71.4% of respondents) but not in routine use (7.8%). Transperineal prostate biopsy was performed at 88.5% of Trusts, with biopsy more likely to be performed by urologists (98.1% of Trusts) or urology nurses (36.5%) than radiologists (26.9%). Patients with high- or very high-risk prostate cancer undergo variable staging pathways, with university teaching hospitals more likely to offer PSMA PET/CT than other settings (33.3% vs 12.0%, P = .023).
conclusionsThis survey shows the current state of UK prostate MRI practice, including universal pre-biopsy MRI. It identifies areas for standardization, including MRI protocols, scoring systems, and national staging guidelines. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Provides an up-to-date snapshot on prostate MRI within the UK.
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.