Evidence Hub

Systematic review and meta-analysis of AI-driven MRI motion artifact detection and correction

Safari M, Eidex Z, Qiu RLJ, Goette M, Wang T, Yang X

Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB), 2026

2 citations

Abstract

Background: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven methods for detecting and correcting magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) motion artifacts, assessing current developments, effectiveness, challenges, and future research directions.

Methods: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, focusing on deep learning (DL) approaches, particularly generative models, for the detection and correction of MRI motion artifacts. Quantitative data were extracted regarding utilized datasets, DL architectures, and performance metrics.

Results: DL, particularly generative models, shows promise for reducing motion artifacts and improving image quality; however, limited generalizability, reliance on paired training data, and risk of visual distortions remain key challenges that motivate standardized datasets and reporting.

Conclusions: AI-driven methods, particularly DL generative models, show significant potential for improving MRI image quality by effectively addressing motion artifacts. However, critical challenges must be addressed, including the need for comprehensive public datasets, standardized reporting protocols for artifact levels, and more advanced, adaptable DL techniques to reduce reliance on extensive paired datasets. Addressing these aspects could substantially enhance MRI diagnostic accuracy, reduce healthcare costs, and improve patient care outcomes.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free