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

Aims: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusions: 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.

ID-Migraine; meta-analysis; migraine; screening; validation

1. Rasmussen BK. Epidemiology of headache. Cephalalgia 2001;21:774–777.

2. Lipton RB, Diamond S, Reed M, Diamond ML, Stewart WF. Migraine diagnosis and treatment: Results from the American Migraine Study II. Headache 2001;41:638–645.

3. Cevoli S, D’Amico D, Martelletti P, et al. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of migraine in Italy: A survey of patients attending for the first time 10 headache centres. Cephalalgia 2009;29: 1285–1293.

4. Lipton RB, Bigal ME, Amatniek JC, Stewart WF. Tools for diagnosing migraine and measuring its severity. Headache 2004;44:387–398.

5. Lipton R, Dodick D, Sadovsky R, et al. A self-administered screener for migraine in primary care: The ID Migraine validation study. Neurology 2003;61:375–382.

6. Zarifog˘lu M, Karli N, Tas¸kapılıog˘lu O. Can ID Migraine be used as a screening test for adolescent migraine? Cephalalgia 2008; 28:65–71.

7. Brighina F, Salemi G, Fierro B, et al. A validation study of an Italian version of the “ID Migraine”. Headache 2007;47:905–908.

8. Gil-Gouveia R, Martins I. Validation of the Portuguese version of ID-Migraine. Headache 2010;50:396–402.

9. Karli N, Ertas M, Baykan B, et al. The validation of ID Migraine screener in neurology outpatient clinics in Turkey. J Headache Pain 2007;8:217–223.

10. Kim ST, Kim CY. Use of the ID Migraine questionnaire for migraine in TMJ and Orofacial Pain Clinic. Headache 2006;46: 253–258.

11. Siva A, Zarifoglu M, Ertas M, et al. Validity of the ID-Migraine screener in the workplace. Neurology 2008;70:1337–1345.

12. Jin Z, Shi L, Wang Y-J, et al. Prevalence of headache among children and adolescents in Shanghai, China. J Clin Neurosci 2013;20:117–121.

13. Wang SJ, Fuh JL, Huang SY, et al. Diagnosis and development of screening items for migraine in neurological practice in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc 2008;107:485–494.

14. Mostardini C, d’Agostino V, Dugoni D, Cerbo R. A possible role of ID-Migraine in the emergency department: Study of an emergency department out-patient population. Cephalalgia 2009;29:1326–1330.

15. Maizels M, Houle T. Results of screening with the brief headache screen compared with a modified ID Migraine. Headache 2008;48:385–394.

16. Villani V, Prosperini L, Pozzilli C, et al. The use of ID migraine questionnaire in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neurol Sci 2011; 32:269–273.

17. Mehuys E, Paemeleire K, Van Hees T, et al. Self-medication of regular headache: A community pharmacy-based survey. Eur J Neurol 2012;19:1093–1099.

18. Khu J, Siow H, Ho K. Headache diagnosis, management and morbidity in the Singapore primary care setting: Findings from a general practice survey. Singapore Med J 2008;49:774–779.

19. Di Piero V, Altieri M, Conserva G, et al. The effects of a sensitisation campaign on unrecognised migraine: The Casilino Study. J Headache Pain 2007;8:205–208.

20. Di Paolo C, Di Nunno A, Vanacore N, Bruti G. ID migraine questionnaire in temporomandibular disorders with craniofacial pain: A study by using a multidisciplinary approach. Neurol Sci 2009;30:295–299.

21. Jurno M, Moreira FP, Ferreira A, et al. Utility of ID-Migraine as a screening tool in the specialty care. Neurology 2012; 78:1.

22. Gil-Gouveia R. Evaluating the performance of ID-migraine, MS-Q and MIDAS scales in portuguese clinicians. Cephalalgia 2011; 31:145–146.

23. Ertas¸ M, Baykan B, Tuncel D, et al. A comparative ID migraine screener study in ophthalmology, ENT and neurology out-patient clinics. Cephalalgia 2009;29:68–75.

24. Gelfand AA, Thomas KC, Goadsby PJ. Before the headache: Infant colic as an early life expression of migraine. Neurology 2012;79:1392–1396.

25. Souza-e-Silva HR, Rocha-Filho PA. Headaches and academic performance in university students: A cross-sectional study. Headache 2011;51:1493–1502.

26. Cousins G, Hijazze S, Van de Laar FA, Fahey T. Diagnostic accuracy of the ID Migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Headache 2011;51:1140–1148.

27. Oztora S, Korkmaz O, Dagdeviren N, et al. Migraine headaches among university students using id migraine test as a screening tool. BMC Neurol 2011;11:103.

28. Headache Classification Subcommittee of the International Headache Society. The International Classification of Headache Disorders: 2nd edition. Cephalalgia 2004;24(Suppl 1):9–160.

29. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:25.

30. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177–188.

31. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary roc curve: Data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993;12:1293–1316.

32. Fagan TJ. Letter: Nomogram for Bayes theorem. N Engl J Med 1975;293:257.

33. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539–1558.

34. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557–560.

35. Thakkinstian A, McElduff P, D’Este C, Duffy D, Attia J. A meth-od for meta-analysis of molecular association studies. Stat Med 2005;24:1291–1306.

36. Deeks JJ, Macaskill P, Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:882–893.

37. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, et al. Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: A systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2004;140:189–202.

38. Ransohoff DF, Feinstein AR. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med 1978;299:926–930.

39. Guidetti V, Galli F. Evolution of headache in childhood and adolescence: An 8-year follow-up. Cephalalgia 1998;18:449–454.

40. Camarda R, Monastero R, Santangelo G, et al. Migraine headaches in adolescents: A five-year follow-up study. Headache 2002;42:1000–1005.

41. Mazzotta G, Carboni F, Guidetti V, et al. Outcome of juvenile headache in outpatients attending 23 Italian headache clinic. Headache 1999;39:737–746.

42. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:25.