Table 5.

Consensus-based recommendations on image quality assessment (section 1), evaluation of interpretation performance (section 2) and reader experience with prostate MRI (section 3). ADC apparent diffusion coefficient, MDT multidisciplinary team, mpMRI multi-parametric MRI

Image quality	Interpretation performance	Reader experience
Checking and reporting the image quality should be performed.	To evaluate interpretation performance, radiologists should use self-performance tests.	Before interpreting prostate mpMRI, radiologists should receive training.
		Radiologists should undertake a combination of core theoretical prostate mpMRI courses and hands-on practice at workstations with supervised reporting.
		Training should be certified.
Visual image assessment by radiologists is adequate enough to determine diagnostic acceptability.	Assessment of radiologist performance should be performed using histopathologic feedback and by comparing to expert reading.	For good prostate MRI quality, assessment of the technical quality measures should be in place.
		A peer review of image quality should be organized.
		Minimal technical requirements of PI-RADS v2 should be met.
Image quality control should be performed ≥ 6 monthly or in 5% of studies.	To evaluate the radiologists’ interpretation performance, external performance assessments should be done.	PI-RADS should be used as the basis of assessments.
		Prostate radiologists should be aware of alternative diagnostic methods.
		Radiologists should participate in MDT meetings or attend MDT-type workshops.
		The MDT must include MRI review with histology results.
The radiologic community should work on a standardized phantom for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements.		The MDT must include urology, radiology, pathology and medical and radiation oncology.
		Prostate radiologists should have knowledge on the added value of MRI and consequences of false results.
		Prostate radiologists should have roles in shared decision-making with respect to biopsy strategies.