What can be learned from the history of recurrence in migraine? A comment.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Treating headache recurrence after emergency department discharge: a randomized controlled trial of naproxen versus sumatriptan.Annals of emergency medicine · 2010
   Trial
2. Variability in recurrence rates with acute treatments for migraine: why recurrence is not an appropriate outcome measure.The journal of headache and pain · 2022
   Review
3. Genetic polymorphisms related to efficacy and overuse of triptans in chronic migraine.The journal of headache and pain · 2010
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as