This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective To determine the interrater variability for TIA diagnostic agreement among expert clinicians (neurologists/stroke physicians), administrative data, and nonspecialists.
Methods We performed a meta-analysis of studies from January 1984 to January 2019 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. Two reviewers independently screened for eligible studies and extracted interrater variability measurements using Cohen's kappa scores to assess diagnostic agreement.
Results Nineteen original studies consisting of 19,421 patients were included. Expert clinicians demonstrate good agreement for TIA diagnosis (κ = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62–0.81). Interrater variability between clinicians' TIA diagnosis and administrative data also demonstrated good agreement (κ = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.62–0.74). There was moderate agreement (κ = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.22–0.61) between referring clinicians and clinicians at TIA clinics receiving the referrals. Sixty percent of 748 patient referrals to TIA clinics were TIA mimics.
Conclusions Overall agreement between expert clinicians was good for TIA diagnosis, although variation still existed for a sizeable proportion of cases. Diagnostic agreement for TIA decreased among nonspecialists. The substantial number of patients being referred to TIA clinics with other (often neurologic) diagnoses was large, suggesting that clinicians, who are proficient in managing TIAs and their mimics, should run TIA clinics.
Footnotes
Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.
- Received October 28, 2019.
- Accepted January 7, 2020.
- © 2020 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
The Nerve!: Rapid online correspondence
NOTE: All contributors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.cp.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.
- Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within the last 8 weeks.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- 200 words maximum.
- 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.