Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23717045›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2013

Preventive treatment in migraine and the new US guidelines.

E Estemalik, S Tepper

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. A prospective, open-label study of milnacipran in the prevention of headache in patients with episodic or chronic migraine.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2014
    Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

E EstemalikCleveland Clinic, Neurological Center for Pain, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
S Tepper
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Migraine headaches are among the most common headache disorders seen in various practices. The prevalence of migraine headaches is 18% in women and 6% in men. While millions of Americans suffer from migraine headaches, roughly 3%-13% of identified migraine patients are on preventive therapy, while an estimated 38% actually need a preventive agent. The challenge among physicians is not only when to start a daily preventive agent but which preventive agent to choose. Circumstances warranting prevention have been described in the past, and in 2012, a new set of guidelines with an evidence review on preventive medications was published. A second set of guidelines provided evidence on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, herbs, minerals, and vitamins for prevention of episodic migraine. This article describes the updated US guidelines for the prevention of migraines and also outlines the major studies from which these guidelines were derived.

Indexed as

Canadian guidelinesclassificationpreventive medicationUS guidelines

Identifiers

PMID23717045
PMCPMC3663475
OpenAlexW1994776902

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.