Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21868455›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2011

Magnitude, impact, and stability of primary headache subtypes: 30 year prospective Swiss cohort study.

Kathleen R Merikangas, Lihong Cui, Amanda Kalaydjian Richardson, Hansruedi Isler, Suzan Khoromi, Erin Nakamura, Femke Lamers, Wulf Rössler, Vladeta Ajdacic-Gross, Alex Gamma and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. [Tension type headaches : Quo vadis?]Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2020
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Nocebo in headaches: implications for clinical practice and trial design.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2012
    Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Kathleen R MerikangasNational Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health, Intramural Research Program, Genetic Epidemiology Research Branch, Bethesda, MD 20892-3720, USA. Kathleen.Merikangas@nih.gov
Lihong Cui
Amanda Kalaydjian Richardson
Hansruedi Isler
Suzan Khoromi
Erin Nakamura
Femke Lamers
Wulf Rössler
Vladeta Ajdacic-Gross
Alex Gamma
Jules Angst

Funding

Zurich Cohort Study of Young AdultsZIAMH002807 · NIMH · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH · PI MERIKANGAS, KATHLEEN R · 2009 to 2015
$831k
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA MH002807PHS HHS ZIAMH002807-07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the prevalence, impact, and stability of different subtypes of headache in a 30 year prospective follow-up study of a general population sample.

designProspective cohort study.

settingCanton of Zurich, Switzerland.

participants591 people aged 19-20 from a cohort of 4547 residents of Zurich, Switzerland, interviewed seven times across 30 years of follow-up.

main outcome measuresPrevalence of headache; stability of the predominant subtype of headache over time; and age of onset, severity, impact, family history, use of healthcare services, and drugs for headache subtypes.

resultsThe average one year prevalences of subtypes of headache were 0.9% (female:male ratio of 2.8) for migraine with aura, 10.9% (female:male ratio of 2.2) for migraine without aura, and 11.5% (female:male ratio of 1.2) for tension-type headache. Cumulative 30 year prevalences of headache subtypes were 3.0% for migraine with aura, 36.0% for migraine without aura, and 29.3% for tension-type headache. Despite the high prevalence of migraine without aura, most cases were transient and only about 20% continued to have migraine for more than half of the follow-up period. 69% of participants with migraine and 58% of those with tension-type headache manifested the same predominant subtype over time. However, the prospective stability of the predominant headache subtypes was quite low, with substantial crossover among the subtypes and no specific ordinal pattern of progression. A gradient of severity of clinical correlates and service use was present across headache subtypes; the greatest effect was for migraine with aura followed by migraine without aura, and then tension-type headache and unclassified headaches.

conclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of prospective follow-up of people with headache. The substantial longitudinal overlap among subtypes of headache shows the developmental heterogeneity of headache syndromes. Studies of the causes of headache that apply diagnostic nomenclature based on distinctions between discrete headache subtypes may not capture the true nature of headache in the general population.

Indexed as

AdultAge of OnsetDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersDisease ProgressionEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHeadache Disorders, PrimaryHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleMiddle AgedNonprescription DrugsPrescription DrugsProspective StudiesSwitzerlandNonprescription DrugsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID21868455
PMCPMC3161722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.