Validation of the Chinese Version of ID-Migraine in Medical Students and Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis Concerning Its Diagnostic Accuracy

• Published in: Journal of oral & facial pain and headache Vol. 29; no. 3; p. 265
• Main Authors: Wang, Xin, San, Yong Zhi, Sun, Jia Mei, Zhou, Hai Bo, Li, Xin, Zhang, Zuo Ming, Zhao, Ya Shuang, Zhu, Yu Lan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 2015
• Subjects: Asian Continental Ancestry Group; Humans; Migraine Disorders - diagnosis; Students, Medical
• ISSN: 2333-0384
• DOI: 10.11607/ofph.1341

To validate the Chinese version of Migraine Screener (ID-Migraine) in medical students in mainland China and to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of ID-Migraine by means of a systematic review with meta-analysis. A total of 555 medical university students participated in the clinical study. Of these, 190 volunteered to take part in a face-to-face consultation and 365 in a telephone interview to diagnose the presence of migraine according to the criteria of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. The correctness of the diagnosis made clinically and by telephone was assessed by Cohen's kappa statistics. Twenty-two studies were included in the meta-analysis. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for the clinical study and the meta-analysis. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Chinese version of ID-Migraine was 84.0% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 75.0%-90.0%) and 64.0% (95% CI: 59.0%-68.0%), respectively. The Cohen's kappa value of the diagnosis obtained by the face-to-face consultation and the telephone interview was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.69-1.00). A total of 8,682 participants from the 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 81.0% (95% CI: 80.0%-82.0%), 68.0% (95% CI: 66.0%-69.0%) and 17.03 (95% CI: 9.94-29.18), respectively. The accurate recognition of migraine by the medical students suggests that the Chinese ID-Migraine version is a valid screening tool. In addition the meta-analysis confirmed the high diagnostic accuracy of this screening tool.