ArticleEuropean urology open science2026
Real-world Inter-rater Agreement of PI-QUAL Version 2 for Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Quality Assessment and Its Association with Diagnostic Accuracy.
Article in European urology open science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06281769 (Clinical Validation of Transrectal Multiparametric Ultrasound Imaging Strategy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Clinical Validation of Transrectal Multiparametric Ultrasound Imaging Strategy (PCaVision) for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: a Head-to-head Comparison With the MRI-based Strategy
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to improve the detection of prostate cancer, the second most diagnosed cancer among men. This study evaluates the inter-rater agreement for MRI quality using Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) v2. It studies the association of PI-QUAL with diagnostic accuracy and the proportion of indeterminate Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions with PI-QUAL scores. Methods: This multicenter cohort study included biopsy-naïve patients from the PCAVISION trial (NCT06281769) who underwent MRI for a suspicion of prostate cancer. Four radiologists independently scored PI-QUAL v2 and PI-RADS. PI-QUAL v2 scores were dichotomized as PI-QUAL 1 versus PI-QUAL ≥2. PI-RADS was dichotomized as PI-RADS ≤2 versus PI-RADS ≥3 and evaluated using percentage agreement, kappa, and Gwet's agree coefficient (AC) 1. The PI-QUAL consensus score was defined by the majority score or by a referee if no majority was reached. In cases with biopsy pathology, the association between PI-QUAL and diagnostic accuracy was assessed. Key findings and limitations: In total, 352 MRI scans were included, with 150 multiparametric MRI and 202 biparametric MRI scans. The percentage agreement for dichotomized PI-QUAL was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51-56%) with AC1 of 0.11 (95% CI 0.06-0.16), mainly due to one reader who strictly applied technical criteria classifying 83% as inadequate (PI-QUAL 1), compared with 12-43% by others. Exclusion of this reader resulted in a percentage agreement of 69% (95% CI 65-73%) and an AC1 of 0.51 (95% CI 0.44-0.58). Consensus classified 24% of MRI scan as PI-QUAL 1 and 76% as PI-QUAL ≥2. In an exploratory analysis, the negative predictive value was 68% (95% CI 47-85%) for PI-QUAL 1 and 74% (95% CI 60-85%) for PI-QUAL ≥2, and the positive predictive value was 62% (95% CI 45-78%) and 50% (95% CI 42-59%), respectively. The proportion of PI-RADS 3 lesions was higher in PI-QUAL 1 scans than in PI-QUAL ≥2 scans (difference of -6.5%, 95% CI -11% to -1.4%, Conclusions and clinical implications: Strict adherence to the technical PI-QUAL criteria led to poor inter-rater agreement, while visual-based assessment yielded moderate agreement. Importantly, higher PI-QUAL scores were linked to fewer indeterminate PI-RADS 3 lesions. Patient summary: We studied how doctors agree when judging the quality of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan using the Prostate Imaging Quality scoring system. When they focused too strictly on technical rules, agreement was poor; when scans were judged visually, agreement improved. Better-quality MRI scans led to fewer unclear ("indeterminate") results, helping doctors make clearer biopsy decisions.
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.