Back

Economic costing of evaluating, deploying and monitoring an artificial intelligence-based reconstruction for acceleration of rectal MRI examinations

Harrison, C. A.; Wu, M.; White, O.; Hopkinson, G.; Hughes, J.; Robertson, S.; Scurr, E.; Shur, J.; Castagnoli, F.; Charles-Edwards, G.; Koh, D.-M.; Winfield, J.

2026-05-21 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.05.18.26353474 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objectives: AI-based reconstructions can reduce MRI acquisition times and/or improve image quality. Guidelines recommend clinical evaluations and post-deployment monitoring of these novel methods, however, there has been little investigation of the clinical resources required for such assessments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the healthcare resource utilisation and potential savings associated with AI-based reconstructions in rectal MRI. Methods: A retrospective economic costing analysis was conducted from the NHS healthcare perspective. Resource utilisation data were extracted from the Electronic Patient Records for 9 healthy volunteer scans and 104 rectal MRI examinations evaluating an AI-based reconstruction. The resource profile included the MRI scan and the staff time required for data acquisition and analysis. Results: The clinical evaluation of the AI-based reconstruction cost {pound}15,023. Deployment of the AI-based reconstruction reduced the length of an MRI rectum scan by 22 minutes, theoretically saving approximately {pound}3,437 per month. Addition of post-deployment quality control scans reduced this monthly saving to {pound}2,636. If the quality control scans were evaluated using radiologists rather than image quality metrics, monthly savings would be approximately {pound}2,541. With ongoing quality control, the clinical evaluation cost would be recouped between 5.8 and 6 months, compared with 4.4 months without ongoing quality control. Conclusions: Deploying AI-based reconstructions can yield cost savings through reduced scanning times. Quality control tests using image quality metrics would save radiological burden and reduce costs compared with conducting repeated image scoring by radiologists.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.9%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 5%
10.4%
3
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.0%
4
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.7%
6
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
7
NMR in Biomedicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
8
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
9
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
10
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
11
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
12
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
13
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
14
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
15
Radiotherapy and Oncology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
16
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
17
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
18
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
19
Physics in Medicine & Biology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
20
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
21
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 61%
0.8%
22
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
23
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
25
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
26
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
27
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.7%
28
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
30
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
72 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.5%