Machine learning models and classification algorithms in the diagnosis of vestibular migraine: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Objectives To perform a systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of machine learning (ML) algorithms in the diagnosis of vestibular migraine. Background Due to the absence of defined biomarkers for diagnosing vestibular migraine (VM), it is valuable to determine which clinic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Headache Vol. 65; no. 4; pp. 695 - 708
Main Authors: Suarez‐Barcena, Pablo D., Parra‐Perez, Alberto M., Martín‐Lagos, Juan, Gallego‐Martinez, Alvaro, Lopez‐Escámez, Jose A., Perez‐Carpena, Patricia
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.04.2025
Subjects:
Accuracy
Algorithms
Artificial intelligence
Biomarkers
Bivariate analysis
Classification Algorithms
Diagnosis
differential diagnosis
Effectiveness
Headache
Humans
Learning algorithms
Machine Learning
Meta-analysis
Migraine
Migraine Disorders - diagnosis
Quality assessment
Quality control
Reviews
Systematic review
Vestibular Diseases - diagnosis
vestibular migraine
Vestibular system
Vestibular tests
classification algorithms
differential diagnosis
vestibular migraine
machine learning
ISSN:0017-8748, 1526-4610, 1526-4610
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives To perform a systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of machine learning (ML) algorithms in the diagnosis of vestibular migraine. Background Due to the absence of defined biomarkers for diagnosing vestibular migraine (VM), it is valuable to determine which clinical, physical, and exploratory information is most crucial to diagnosing this disease. The use of artificial intelligence tools could streamline this process. Methods This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines and searched for records from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Observational (case–control and cohort) studies were included to assess the ability of artificial intelligence (AI) to distinguish VM from other vestibular disorders. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐AI tool. Results A total of 14 articles were included in the systematic review, and 10 were eligible for meta‐analysis. The main inputs included for the ML algorithms were anamnesis (medical history), physical examination, results from audiological and vestibular tests, and imaging. The global sensitivity was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73–0.92, I2 = 96%), while the global specificity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84–0.93, I2 = 95%). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 48.15 (95% CI 17.64–131.43, I2 = 97%). Using the bivariate model, the area under the curve and for the summary receiver operating characteristic curve, using the 10 available studies, was 0.94 (95% CI 0.86–0.96). Conclusion Machine learning algorithms could be used as effective tools for the diagnosis process in VM. The use of models trained with three to four inputs yield the highest accuracy, compared to other strategies. However, the design and validation of these studies could be improved to ensure the reproducibility and generalizability of results. Plain Language Summary The diagnosis of vestibular migraine (VM) is based on a list of symptoms reported by patients, but this can sometimes lead to delays in diagnosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to understand whether machine learning tools can help to diagnose patients with VM based on clinical and physical information, or other complementary tests. We found that combining clinical information and machine learning methods could facilitate and shorten the diagnostic process of VM.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Undefined-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
ObjectType-Review-4
content type line 23
ISSN:0017-8748
1526-4610
1526-4610
DOI:10.1111/head.14924