Evidence Hub

Diagnostic accuracy of the ID Migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cousins G, Hijazze S, Van de Laar FA, Fahey T

Headache, 2011

5,866 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the identification of migraine (ID Migraine) as a decision rule for identifying patients with migraine.

BACKGROUND: The ID Migraine screening tool is designed to identify patients with migraine in primary care settings. Several studies have validated the ID Migraine across various clinical settings, including primary care, neurology departments, headache clinics, dental clinics, ear, nose, and throat (ENT) and ophthalmology.

METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all studies validating the ID Migraine, with the International Headache Criteria as the reference standard. The methodological quality of selected studies was assessed using the Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. All selected studies were combined using a bivariate random effects model. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted, pooling only those studies using representative patient groups (primary care, neurology departments, and headache clinics) to determine the potential influence of spectrum bias on the results.

RESULTS: Thirteen studies incorporating 5866 patients are included. The weighted prior probability of migraine across the 13 studies is 59%. The ID Migraine is shown to be useful for ruling out rather than ruling in migraine, with a greater pooled sensitivity estimate (0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.90) than specificity (0.76, 95% confidence interval…

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. Reported size: 5,866 participants or records.

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