Validation studies on migraine diagnostic tools for use in nonclinical settings: a systematic review

作者全名："Wei, Du; Wong, Li Ping; Loganathan, Tharani; Tang, Rong-Rui; Chang, Yue; Zhou, Han-Ni; Kaabar, Mohammed K. A."

作者地址："[Wei, Du; Wong, Li Ping; Loganathan, Tharani] Univ Malaya, Fac Med, Dept Social & Prevent Med, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; [Wei, Du; Chang, Yue; Zhou, Han-Ni] Guizhou Med Univ, Sch Med & Hlth Management, Guiyang, Peoples R China; [Tang, Rong-Rui] Chongqing Med Univ, Dept Neurosurg, Univ Town Hosp, Chongqing, Peoples R China; [Kaabar, Mohammed K. A.] Univ Malaya, Fac Sci, Inst Math Sci, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; [Kaabar, Mohammed K. A.] Washington State Univ, Dept Math & Stat, Pullman, WA 99164 USA"

通信作者："Wong, LP (通讯作者)，Univ Malaya, Fac Med, Dept Social & Prevent Med, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia."

来源：ARQUIVOS DE NEURO-PSIQUIATRIA

ESI学科分类：NEUROSCIENCE & BEHAVIOR

WOS号：WOS:000874120900001

JCR分区：Q4

影响因子：1.4

年份：2022

卷号：　

期号：　

开始页：　

结束页：　

文献类型：Review; Early Access

关键词：Migraine Disorders; Diagnosis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Systematic Review

摘要："Background Migraine underdiagnosis and undertreatment are so widespread, that hence is essential to diagnose migraine sufferers in nonclinical settings. A systematic review of validation studies on migraine diagnostic tools applicable to nonclinical settings can help researchers and practitioners in tool selection decisions. Objective To systematically review and critically assess published validation studies on migraine diagnostic tools for use in nonclinical settings, as well as to describe their diagnostic performance. Methods A multidisciplinary workgroup followed transparent and systematic procedures to collaborate on this work. PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science were searched for studies up to January 17, 2022. The QUADAS-2 was employed to assess methodological quality, and the quality thresholds adopted by the Global Burden Disease study were used to tail signaling questions. Results From 7,214 articles identified, a total of 27 studies examining 19 tools were eligible for inclusion. There has been no high-quality evidence to support any tool for use of migraine diagnosis in nonclinical settings. The diagnostic accuracy of the ID-migraine, structured headache and HARDSHIP questionnaires have been supported by moderate-quality evidence, with sensitivity and specificity above 70%. Of them, the HARDSHIP questionnaire has been the most extensively validated. The remaining 16 tools have provided poor-quality evidence for migraine diagnosis in nonclinical populations. Conclusions Up till now, the HARDSHIP questionnaire is the optimal choice for diagnosing migraine in nonclinical settings, with satisfactory diagnostic accuracy supported by moderate methodological quality. This work reveals the crucial next step, which is further high-quality validation studies in diverse nonclinical population groups."

基金机构：　

基金资助正文：