Technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal MRI: a consensus project of the Cooperation in Science and Technology Action PARENCHIMA

Purpose The potential of renal MRI biomarkers has been increasingly recognised, but clinical translation requires more standardisation. The PARENCHIMA consensus project aims to develop and apply a process for generating technical recommendations on renal MRI. Methods A task force was formed in July 2018 focused on fve methods. A draft process for attaining consensus was distributed publicly for consultation and fnalised at an open meeting (Prague, October 2018). Four expert panels completed surveys between October 2018 and March 2019, discussed results and refned the surveys at a face-to-face meeting (Aarhus, March 2019) and completed a second round (May 2019). Results A seven-stage process was defned: (1) formation of expert panels; (2) defnition of the context of use; (3) literature review; (4) collection and comparison of MRI protocols; (5) consensus generation by an approximate Delphi method; (6) reporting of results in vendor-neutral and vendor-specifc terms; (7) ongoing review and updating. Application of the process resulted in 166 consensus statements. Conclusion The process generated meaningful technical recommendations across very diferent MRI methods, while allowing for improvement and refnement as open issues are resolved. The results are likely to be widely supported by the renal MRI community and thereby promote more harmonisation

Correction to: Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI.

The article Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI

Correction to: Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI.

The article Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Correction to : Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI

The article Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI

Correction to: Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI.

The article Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI

Correction to: Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MRI

The article Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal diffusion-weighted MR

Technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal MRI: a consensus project of the Cooperation in Science and Technology Action PARENCHIMA

Purpose The potential of renal MRI biomarkers has been increasingly recognised, but clinical translation requires more standardisation. The PARENCHIMA consensus project aims to develop and apply a process for generating technical recommendations on renal MRI. Methods A task force was formed in July 2018 focused on fve methods. A draft process for attaining consensus was distributed publicly for consultation and fnalised at an open meeting (Prague, October 2018). Four expert panels completed surveys between October 2018 and March 2019, discussed results and refned the surveys at a face-to-face meeting (Aarhus, March 2019) and completed a second round (May 2019). Results A seven-stage process was defned: (1) formation of expert panels; (2) defnition of the context of use; (3) literature review; (4) collection and comparison of MRI protocols; (5) consensus generation by an approximate Delphi method; (6) reporting of results in vendor-neutral and vendor-specifc terms; (7) ongoing review and updating. Application of the process resulted in 166 consensus statements. Conclusion The process generated meaningful technical recommendations across very diferent MRI methods, while allowing for improvement and refnement as open issues are resolved. The results are likely to be widely supported by the renal MRI community and thereby promote more harmonisation