SynthesisBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Sensitivity and specificity of the video head impulse test in the diagnosis of vestibular migraine - A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo estimate the proportion of patients with VM who have abnormal vHIT results and to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the test to detect VM.
methodsThis study followed PRISMA guidelines to conduct a meta-analysis on the accuracy of vHIT in VM patients. A literature search was performed in ten indexes databases (PubMed, PubMed PMC, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, BVS, ProQuest, Epistemonikos and MEDLINE) without time restrictions, using the descriptors "Vestibular Migraine" AND "Video Head Impulse Test". Studies were selected based on the PICO strategy (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome). Statistical analysis used the random-effects method to pool results, assessing heterogeneity among studies with Cochran'sQ test and the I
resultsNine studies published between 2016 and 2023 were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of abnormal results was 43%. vHIT had a sensitivity of 42%, specificity of 89%, positive predictive value of 83%, and negative predictive value of 54% for VM diagnosis. Saccades was observed in 36% of cases. Normal VOR gain was found in 22% of cases, while low VOR gain was observed in 12%. The gains in the lateral, anterior, and posterior semicircular canals ranged from 0.87 to 0.90. Except for normal VOR gain, all other outcomes showed high heterogeneity across studies.
conclusion43% of VM patients exhibited abnormalities in vHIT. The test demonstrated low sensitivity and high specificity to detect VM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.