SBMU Journals
  • New Submission
  • Register
  • Login
  • English
    • 简体中文

Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine

  • Home
  • About
    • Policies
    • Editorial Team
    • Reviewer guideline
    • Contact
  • Issues
    • Current
    • Archives
  • Announcements
  • Indexing/Abstracting
  • For authors
    • New Submission
    • Author guidelines
    • Article withdrawal
    • Peer review process
    • FAQ
  • Ethics
    • Ethical requirements
    • Plagiarism Policy
    • Authorship conflicts
    • Malpractice statements
    • Copyright Notice
    • Intellectual properties
    • Preprint Policy
    • Privacy Statement
    • Artificial intelligence & Authorship
    • Retraction Cosiderations
Advanced Search
  1. Home
  2. Archives
  3. Vol. 13 No. 1 (2025): Continuous volume
  4. Original/Research Article

Vol. 13 No. 1 (2025)

September 2025

Accuracy and Clinical Utility of Clinical Predictive Models for Identifying Dizziness with Central Causes; A Retrospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study

  • Shunsuke Soma
  • Katsunori Ito
  • Tsukasa Kamitani

Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine, Vol. 13 No. 1 (2025), 6 September 2025 , Page e84
https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v13i1.2787 Published: 2025-11-21

  • View Article
  • Download
  • Cite
  • References
  • Statastics
  • Share

Abstract

Introduction: Although several clinical prediction models (CPMs) have been developed for identifying acute dizziness with central causes, their application in clinical practice remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and clinical utility of four CPMs in identifying dizziness with central lesions.

Methods: This single-center, retrospective, diagnostic accuracy study was conducted at the ED of Aomori Hospital, Japan, from April to March 2023. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of four risk stratification models (ABCD2, TriAGe+, PCI, and Sudbury) in predicting dizziness with central causes were evaluated considering the brain imaging (computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) findings, interpreted by a neurologist or neurosurgeon, as the gold standard. Calibration was evaluated visually using calibration plots. Additionally, analyses of efficacy, safety, and clinical utility using a decision curve were conducted.

Results: Of the 3,606 patients identified, 2,958 with the mean age of 65.3 ± 16.4 (range: 15-97.) years were included in the final analysis (64.7% female). 155 (5.2 %) were diagnosed with central lesions. The AUROCs were 0.67 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62–0.71) for ABCD2, 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76–0.84) for TriAGe+, 0.82 (0.78-0.86) for PCI, and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82–0.88) for Sudbury. TriAGe+, PCI, and Sudbury demonstrated good calibration. Among these, the Sudbury model demonstrated the highest diagnostic efficiency, was the only model to meet safety criteria, and provided the highest net benefit in decision curve analysis, particularly at lower predicted prevalence thresholds.

Conclusion: The TriAGe+, PCI, and Sudbury models demonstrated strong discriminatory performance and reliable calibration when applied during ED admission at a community hospital. Particularly, the Sudbury model may reduce false-negative outcomes for central lesions, thereby potentially minimizing the need for unnecessary neuroimaging in patients identified as low-risk.

Keywords:
  • Dizziness
  • Vertigo
  • Emergency Service, Hospital
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Clinical Decision Rules
  • pdf

How to Cite

1.
Soma S, Ito K, Kamitani T. Accuracy and Clinical Utility of Clinical Predictive Models for Identifying Dizziness with Central Causes; A Retrospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study . Arch Acad Emerg Med [Internet]. 2025 Nov. 21 [cited 2026 Jul. 7];13(1):e84. Available from: https://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/aaem/index.php/AAEM/article/view/2787
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX

References

1. Kerber KA, Meurer WJ, West BT, Fendrick AM. Dizziness presentations in U.S. emergency departments, 1995-2004. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(8):744-50.

2. Newman-Toker DE, Hsieh YH, Camargo CA, Jr., Pelletier AJ, Butchy GT, Edlow JA. Spectrum of dizziness visits to US emergency departments: cross-sectional analysis from a nationally representative sample. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(7):765-75.

3. Cheung CS, Mak PS, Manley KV, Lam JM, Tsang AY, Chan HM, et al. Predictors of important neurological causes of dizziness among patients presenting to the emergency department. Emerg Med J. 2010;27(7):517-21.

4. Kim Y, Faysel M, Balucani C, Yu D, Gilles N, Levine SR. Ischemic Stroke Predictors in Patients Presenting with Dizziness, Imbalance, and Vertigo. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;27(12):3419-24.

5. Navi BB, Kamel H, Shah MP, Grossman AW, Wong C, Poisson SN, et al. Rate and predictors of serious neurologic causes of dizziness in the emergency department. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87(11):1080-8.

6. Tarnutzer AA, Lee SH, Robinson KA, Wang Z, Edlow JA, Newman-Toker DE. ED misdiagnosis of cerebrovascular events in the era of modern neuroimaging: A meta-analysis. Neurology. 2017;88(15):1468-77.

7. Kerber KA, Schweigler L, West BT, Fendrick AM, Morgenstern LB. Value of computed tomography scans in ED dizziness visits: analysis from a nationally representative sample. Am J Emerg Med. 2010;28(9):1030-6.

8. Kim AS, Sidney S, Klingman JG, Johnston SC. Practice variation in neuroimaging to evaluate dizziness in the ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30(5):665-72.

9. Shah VP, Oliveira JESL, Farah W, Seisa M, Kara Balla A, Christensen A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of neuroimaging in emergency department patients with acute vertigo or dizziness: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2023;30(5):517-30.

10. Grewal K, Austin PC, Kapral MK, Lu H, Atzema CL. Missed strokes using computed tomography imaging in patients with vertigo: population-based cohort study. Stroke. 2015;46(1):108-13.

11. Navi BB, Kamel H, Shah MP, Grossman AW, Wong C, Poisson SN, et al. Application of the ABCD2 score to identify cerebrovascular causes of dizziness in the emergency department. Stroke. 2012;43(6):1484-9.

12. Kuroda R, Nakada T, Ojima T, Serizawa M, Imai N, Yagi N, et al. The TriAGe+ Score for Vertigo or Dizziness: A Diagnostic Model for Stroke in the Emergency Department. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2017;26(5):1144-53.

13. Chen R, Su R, Deng M, Liu J, Hu Q, Song Z. A Posterior Circulation Ischemia Risk Score System to Assist the Diagnosis of Dizziness. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;27(2):506-12.

14. Bi Y, Cao F. A Dynamic Nomogram to Predict the Risk of Stroke in Emergency Department Patients With Acute Dizziness. Front Neurol. 2022;13:839042.

15. Han E, Kim JH, You JS, Son WJ, Beom JH. Predictive model for diagnosing central lesions in emergency department patients with isolated dizziness who undergo diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Acad Emerg Med. 2022;29(1):15-27.

16. Ohle R, Savage DW, Roy D, McIsaac S, Singh R, Lelli D, et al. Development of a Clinical Risk Score to Risk Stratify for a Serious Cause of Vertigo in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department. Ann Emerg Med. 2025;85(2):122-31.

17. Sisk R, Sperrin M, Peek N, van Smeden M, Martin GP. Imputation and missing indicators for handling missing data in the development and deployment of clinical prediction models: A simulation study. Stat Methods Med Res. 2023;32(8):1461-77.

18. Kene MV, Ballard DW, Vinson DR, Rauchwerger AS, Iskin HR, Kim AS. Emergency Physician Attitudes, Preferences, and Risk Tolerance for Stroke as a Potential Cause of Dizziness Symptoms. West J Emerg Med. 2015;16(5):768-76.

19. Fujii K, Takada T, Kamitani T, Aoki T, Takeshima T, Kudo M, et al. Diagnostic Performance of Physician Gestalt for Bacteremia in Patients in the Process of Being Admitted With Suspected Infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;76(6):1074-9.

20. Yu AH, Leung LY, Leung TWH, Abrigo JM, Cheung KH, Cheng CH, et al. The TriAGe + score for vertigo or dizziness: A validation study in a university hospital emergency department in Hong Kong. Am J Emerg Med. 2024;77:39-45.

  • Abstract Viewed: 43 times
  • pdf Downloaded: 120 times

Download Statastics

  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Plus
  • Telegram

Make a Submission

Make a Submission

SJR

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

COPE

Current Issue

  • Atom logo
  • RSS2 logo
  • RSS1 logo

Information

  • For Readers
  • For Authors
  • For Librarians
  • Home
  • Archives
  • Submissions
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Team
  • Contact

This journal is distributed under the terms of CC BY-NC 3.0. Design and publishing by SBMU journals. All credits and honors to PKP for their OJS. 

 Sitemap | ISSN-ONLINE: 2645-4904

Support Contact: ma.saghaei63@gmail.com

With the goal of net zero carbon emissions, this journal is published only in electronic format.

Powered by OJSPlus