Estudos de validação de ferramentas de diagnóstico de enxaqueca (migrânea) para uso em ambientes não clínicos: uma revisão sistemática

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

Du Wei

conceptualized the research framework and designed the methodology

conducted the literature search, screening, and review

appraised the quality of included studies

were involved in data extraction, assisted with the analysis and initial draft

final submitted version has been read and approved

Universiti Malaya, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Guizhou Medical University, School of Medicine and Health Management, Guiyang, China

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6764-8491

Li Ping Wong

conceptualized the research framework and designed the methodology

resolved any disagreements, did the manuscript correcting, language editing, and study supervision

final submitted version has been read and approved

Universiti Malaya, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0107-0532

Tharani Loganathan

conceptualized the research framework and designed the methodology

resolved any disagreements, did the manuscript correcting, language editing, and study supervision

final submitted version has been read and approved

Universiti Malaya, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6690-000X

Rong-Rui Tang

conducted the literature search, screening, and review

final submitted version has been read and approved

University-Town Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Department of Neurosurgery, Chongqing, China

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1116-6586

Yue Chang

appraised the quality of included studies

final submitted version has been read and approved

Guizhou Medical University, School of Medicine and Health Management, Guiyang, China

Han-Ni Zhou

conducted the literature search, screening, and review

final submitted version has been read and approved

Guizhou Medical University, School of Medicine and Health Management, Guiyang, China

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7570-1758

Mohammed K. A. Kaabar

were involved in data extraction, assisted with the analysis and initial draft

final submitted version has been read and approved

Universiti Malaya, Faculty of Science, Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Washington State University, Pullman, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Washington, United States

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2260-0341

Address for correspondence Li Ping Wong (e-mail: wonglp@ummc.edu.my).

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.

	Inclusion	Exclusion
Population	Human adults (≥ 18 years old)	Nonhumans; Humans aged <18 years old
Setting	Nonclinical settings	Clinical settings
Tool	Tools intended to diagnose, classify, or screen for migraine, including migraine subtypes	Tools not for migraine
Reference	The gold standard, diagnosis by a neurologist based on the ICHD criteria	Others
Outcome	Reporting at least the following diagnostic accuracy outcomes: sensitivity, specificity, PPV, or NPV	No report of diagnostic accuracy
Language	English	Others
Publication	Peer-review publications	Unpublished studies, gray literature, reviews, guidelines, letters, commentaries, conference abstracts, and editorials

Tool	References	Aim	Translation		Sample			Reference standard	Time interval
Tool	References	Aim	Language	Verification	Setting (Administration)	Characteristics	Selection	Reference standard	Time interval
ID-Migraine	Siva et al. 2008	Migraine totally	Turkish	Y	Workplace (FTF interview)	N=227 Age:31.9 ± 5.9 F: 65.6%	Convenience, preliminarily screen-positive	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	Within 1 week
	Wang et al. 2015	Migraine totally	Chinese	N	University (Not mentioned)	N = 555 Age: 22.03 ±1.53 F: 71.7%	Volunteers and random	Clinical diagnosis or telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	10 months
	Csépány et al. 2018	Migraine totally	Hungarian	N	Healthcare (Not mentioned)	N = 380 Age: median 36 F: 80%	Consecutive	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-3β	At the same time
Extended Version of ID- Migraine	Streel et al. 2015	Migraine totally MA	French	Original	General (Self-administered)	N = 67 Age: 20-69 F: 58.2%	Convenience	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	Medical history
MS-Q	Láinez et al. 2005	Migraine totally	Spanish	Original	Healthcare (Self-administered)	N = 140 Age: 39.2 ± 13 F: 73%	Volunteer	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD	At the same time
	Láinez et al. 2010	Migraine totally	Spanish	No need	Healthcare (Self-administered)	N = 9,346 Age: 48.9-50.1 ± 17.2 F: 61.9%	Consecutive	Medical records by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	At the same time
	Delic et al. 2018	Migraine totally	Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian	Y	Healthcare (Self-administered)	N = 429 Age: 46-47.6 ± 12.6-12.7 F: 72.7%	Consecutive	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-3	At the same time
Simple Questionnaire	Gervil et al. 1998	Migraine totally	Danish	Original	Healthcare and family (Not mentioned)	N = 2,035	Twin census	Telephone interview by a doctor based on ICHD	1–2 years
MSMDQ	Rueda-Sánchez and Díaz-Martínez 2004	Migraine totally	Spanish	N	University (Self-administered)	N = 170	Volunteer and random	Interview bya neurologist based on ICHD	Within 2–3 weeks
SHQ	el-Sherbiny et al. 2017	EM CM	Arabic	Y	General (FTF interview)	N = 232 Age:41.2 ± 10.9 F: 72.8%	Random	Detailed assessment by two neurologists based on ICHD-3β	After 6 months
VARS	Eriksen et al. 2005	MA	Danish	Original	Healthcare and family (FTF interview)	N = 362 patients and 108 controls	Volunteer	Telephone interview by a specially trained physician based on ICHD-2	At the same time
VARS	Kim et al. 2022	MA	Korean	Y	Healthcare (Self-administered)	N = 240 Age: 25-50 F: 87.5%	Volunteer	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-3	At the same time
DHD	Phillip et al. 2007	Migraine totally	Danish or English	N	General (Examined by trained observer)	N = 49 Age: mean 44 (26-70) F: 75.6%	Volunteer	Clinical diagnosis or telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD	A maximum of 24 headache days or 2 months
DMQ3	Kirchmann et al. 2006	Migraine totally MO MA MO ± MA	Danish	No need	Healthcare and family (Self-administered)	N = 147 (patients and controls) Age: median 45 (18-65) F: 74.4%	Volunteer and random	Telephone interview by a trained physician based on ICHD-2	2–3 years
FMSQ	Kallela et al. 2001	MO MA MO ± MA	Finnish	Original	Healthcare and family (Self-administered)	N = 94 Age: 44.6 ± 10.9 F: 71.3%	Consecutive	Telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD	Not mentioned
ID-CM	Lipton et al. 2016	Migraine totally CM	English	Original	General (Self-administered)	N = 111 Age: 46.2 ± 13.4 F: 82.9%	Quota and volunteer	Telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD-3β	Not mentioned
LUMINA	Van Oosterhout et al. 2011	MA	English	Original	Healthcare (Self-administered)	N = 200 Age:43.3 ± 11.5 F: 88.5%	Volunteer and random, preliminarily screen-positive	Telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	Not mentioned
HUNT	Hagen et al. 2000	Migraine totally	Norwegian	Original	General (Self-administered)	N = 167	Volunteer and random	Clinical interview by a neurologist based on ICHD	4–8 months
HUNT3	Hagen et al. 2010	Migraine totally MA	Norwegian	No need	General (Self-administered)	N = 297 Age: mean 52.3 F: 51%	Volunteer and random	Interview + clinical diagnosis by neurologists based on ICHD-2	50 days (95% CI 48–52)
HUNT4	Hagen et al. 2019	Migraine totally MA	Norwegian	No need	General (Self-administered)	N = 232 Age: mean 58.4 F: 65.52%	Volunteer and random	Interview by neurologists based on ICHD-3	60 days (95% CI 56–62 days)
SAHQ	Fritsche et al. 2007	Migraine totally Migraine+TTH	German	No need	Healthcare (Self-administered)	Patients: N = 278 Age: mean 43.9 F: 51.1% Controls: N=42	Case-control	Clinical diagnosis by three neurologists based on ICHD-2	At the same time
NIBQ	Abrignani et al. 2012	MO MA (1.2.1, 1.2.2)^† MA (1.2.3)^†	Italian	Original	Healthcare (FTF interview)	N = 50 Age: 40.7 ± 12.8 F: 74%	Consecutive	Clinical diagnosis by one of two neurologists based on ICHD-2	On the same day
HARDSHIP	Ayzenberg et al. 2011	Migraine totally	Russian	Y	General (FTF interview)	N = 190	Random	Telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	4–8 weeks
	Yu et al. 2011	Migraine totally	Chinese	Y	General (FTF interview)	N = 399	Random	Telephone interview by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	Not mentioned
	Rao et al. 2012	Migraine totally	Kannada (India)	Y	General (FTF interview)	N = 381	Random	Interview by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	Within 3–6 weeks
	Herekar et al. 2013	Migraine totally	Urdu (Pakistan)	Y	Healthcare and family (FTF interview)	N = 180 Age:39.4 ± 14.2 F: 53.9%	Convenience	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	At the same time
POEM	Kaiser et al. 2019	Migraine totally MO MA	English	Original	Healthcare and community (Self-administered)	N = 90 patients and controls Age: 41-42 ± 6-7 F: 68-87%	Case-control	Clinical diagnosis by a neurologist based on ICHD-2	The gold standard is 5–9 years earlier

Tool	Study reference	Risk of bias					Concerns regarding applicability				Quality
Tool	Study reference	Patient selection	Index test	Reference standard	Flow and timing	Overall	Patient selection	Index test	Reference standard	Overall	Quality
ID-Migraine	Siva et al. 2008	☹	☺	☺	☺	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	MQ
	Wang et al. 2015	☹	☹	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
	Csépány et al. 2018	☺	?	?	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
Extended version of ID-migraine	Streel et al. 2015	☹	☹	?	?	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
MS-Q	Láinez et al. 2005	☹	☹	?	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
	Láinez et al. 2010	☺	☹	☺	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
	Delic et al. 2018	☺	☹	?	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
Simple questionnaire	Gervil et al. 1998	☺	?	☺	☹	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
MSMDQ	Rueda-Sánchez and Diaz-Martinez, 2004	☹	☹	☺	☺	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
SHQ	el-Sherbiny et al. 2017	☺	☺	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	MQ
VARS	Eriksen et al. 2005	☹	☹	☹	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
VARS	Kim et al. 2022	☹	☹	☺	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
DHD	Phillip et al. 2007	☹	☺	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
DMQ3	Kirchmann et al. 2006	☹	☹	☺	☹	At risk	☹	☹	☺	Concerns	LQ
FMSQ	Kallela et al. 2001	☺	☹	?	?	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
ID-CM	Upton et al. 2016	☹	☹	?	?	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
LUMINA	Van Oosterhout et al. 2011	☹	☹	?	?	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
HUNT	Hagen et al. 2000	☹	☹	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
HUNT3	Hagen et al. 2010	☹	☹	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
HUNT4	Hagen et al. 2019	☹	☹	?	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	LQ
SAHQ	Fritsche et al. 2007	☹	☹	☺	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
IIBQ	Abrignani et al. 2012	☺	☺	☺	☹	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ
HARDSHIP	Ayzenberg et al. 2011	☺	☺	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	MQ
	Yu et al. 2011	☺	☺	☺	?	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	MQ
	Rao et al. 2012	☺	☺	☺	☹	At risk	☺	☺	☺	Low concern	MQ
	Herekar et al. 2013	☹	☺	☺	☺	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	MQ
POEM	Kaiser et al. 2019	☹	☹	?	☹	At risk	☹	☺	☺	Concerns	LQ

Tool	Study references	Aim	Sensitivity (%, 95% CI)	Specificity (%, 95% CI)	PPV (%, 95% CI)	NPV (%, 95% CI)
ID-Migraine	Siva et al. 2008	Migraine totally	70.9(65.1–75.9)	79.1 (72.9–83.7)	78.3	71.9
	Wang et al. 2015	Migraine totally	84 (75–90)	64 (59–68)	33	95
	Csépány et al. 2018	Migraine totally	95 (92–97)	42 (31–55)	88(84–91)	65 (50–78)
Extended version of ID- migraine	Streel et al. 2015	Migraine totally MA	Migraine totally: 87.5 (74.3–100) MA: 83.3 (53.5–100)	Migraine totally: 100(91.4–100) MA: 96.7 (92.3–100)	Migraine totally: 100 (82.4–100) MA: 71.4 (38–100)	Migraine totally: 93.5 (86.3–100) MA: 98.3 (95.1–100)
MS-Q	Láinez et al. 2005	Migraine totally	93 (87–99)	81 (72–91)	83% (75–91%)	92 (85–99)
	Láinez et al. 2010	Migraine totally	82 (81–84)	98 (98–99)	95% (94–96%)	94 (93–95)
	Delic et al. 2018	Migraine totally	80 (74.7–84.6)	87.2 (81.1–91.9)	91% (87.1–93.8%)	72.9(67.8–77.6)
Simple questionnaire	Gervil et al. 1998	Migraine totally	85	81	49%	86
MSMDQ	Rueda-Sánchez and Diaz-Martinez, 2004	Migraine totally	37.9 (25.8, 51.7)	99.1 (94.4–100)	95.7 (76–99.8)	75.5 (67.6–82.1)
SHQ	el-Sherbiny, 2017	EM CM	EM: 86 (78–97) CM: 71 (52–99)	EM: 94 (86–98) CM: 98(82–100)	EM: 86 (69–98) CM: 78 (63–96)	EM: 92 (87–99) CM: 96(82–100)
VARS	Eriksen et al. 2005	MA	91 (86–95)	96 (91–100)	99	78
	Kim et al. 2022	MA	96.4 (84.5–99.6)	79.5 (72.9–85)	58.2 (51.1–65)	98.7 (95–99.7)
DHD	Phillip et al. 2007	Migraine totally	97%	29	85	75
DMQ3	Kirchmann et al. 2006	Migraine totally MO MA MO + MA	Migraine totally: 99 (97–100) MO: 91 (81–100) MA: 77 (63–90) MO + MA: 63 (48–78)	Migraine totally: 86 (75–97) MO: 93 (88–98) MA: 88 (82–94) MO + MA: 92 (87–97)	Migraine totally: 96 MO: 79 MA: 70 MO + MA: 73	Migraine totally: 97 MO: 97 MA: 91 MO + MA: 88
FMSQ	Kallela et al. 2001	MO MA MO + MA	MO: 61 MA: 89 MO + MA: 74	MO: 100 MA: 96 MO + MA: 97	MO: 100 MA: 85 MO + MA: 91	MO: 89 MA: 97 MO + MA: 90
ID-CM	Lipton et al. 2016	Migraine totally CM	Migraine totally: 83.5 CM: 80.6	Migraine totally: 88.5 CM: 88.6	Migraine totally: 62.2 CM: 75	Migraine totally: 96 CM: 91.5
LUMINA	Van Oosterhout et al. 2011	MA	86	75	74	86
HUNT	Hagen et al. 2000	Migraine totally	24	100	100	62
HUNT3	Hagen et al. 2010	Migraine totally MA	Migraine totally: 51 (45–97) MA: 50 (44–56)	Migraine totally: 95 (92–98) MA: 95 (93–97)	Migraine totally: 61 MA: 43	Migraine totally: 93 MA: 98
HUNT4	Hagen et al. 2019	Migraine totally MA	Migraine totally: 48 (32–63) MA: 33 (11–55)	Migraine totally: 93 (90–96) MA: 94 (91–97)	Migraine totally: 63 MA: 37	Migraine totally: 89 MA: 93
SAHQ	Fritsche et al. 2007	Migraine totally Migraine + TTH	Migraine totally: 73.2 (63.2–81.7) Migraine + TTH: 62.1 (42.3–79.3)	Migraine totally: 96.1 (92.2–98.4) Migraine + TTH: 97.8 (94.9–99.3)	Migraine totally: 91 (82.4-96.3) Migraine + TTH: 78.3 (56.3–92.5)	Migraine totally: 87 (81.5–91.3) Migraine + TTH: 95.3 (91.8–97.6)
IIBQ	Abrignani et al. 201 2	MO MA (1.2.1, 1.2.2)^† MA(1.2.3)^†	MO: 100 MA (1.2.1, 1.2.2): 100 MA(1.2.3): 50 (36–64)	MO: 93.3 (86–100) MA (1.2.1, 1.2.2): 100 MA (1.2.3): 100	MO: 97 MA (1.2.1, 1.2.2): 100 MA (1.2.3): 100	MO: 100 MA (1.2.1, 1.2.2): 100 MA (1.2.3): 98
HARDSHIP	Ayzenberg et al. 2011	Migraine totally	76.9 (68.1–84)	82.4 (77.8–86.1)	69.4 (61.5–75.8)	87.3 (82.4–91.2)
	Yu et al. 2011	Migraine totally	83.3 (79.7–87)	99 (97.5–99.8)	83% (70–96.7)	99 (97.5–99.8)
	Rao et al. 2012	Migraine totally	63 (52–72)	85 (81–89)	55 (45–65)	89 (85–92)
	Herekar et al. 2013	Migraine totally	74	87	60	92
POEM	Kaiser et al. 2019	Migraine totally MO MA	Migraine totally: 83 MO: 59 MA: 70	Migraine totally: 90 MO: 84 MA: 93	Migraine totally: 94 MO: 63 MA: 84	Migraine totally: 74 MO: 81 MA: 86

[1] Address for correspondence Li Ping Wong (e-mail: wonglp@ummc.edu.my).

Brasil

Brasil

Estudos de validação de ferramentas de diagnóstico de enxaqueca (migrânea) para uso em ambientes não clínicos: uma revisão sistemática

Resumo

Antecedentes

Objetivo

Métodos

Resultados

Conclusões