ArticleHeadache2013
Rounding behavior in the reporting of headache frequency complicates headache chronification research.
Article in Headache, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and characteristics of cutaneous allodynia in probable migraine.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Comparing prospective headache diary and retrospective four-week headache questionnaire over 20 weeks: Secondary data analysis from a randomized controlled trial.Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache · 2020Trial
- Enhancing Migraine Trigger Surprisal Predictions: A Bayesian Approach to Establishing Prospective Expectations.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Flexible modeling of headache frequency fluctuations in migraine with hidden Markov models.Headache · 2025Article
- Reporting Quality and Risk of Bias Analysis of Published RCTs Assessing Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Deep and unbiased proteomics, pathway enrichment analysis, and protein-protein interaction of biomarker signatures in migraine.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2024Article
- Neuroimaging features of whole-brain functional connectivity predict attack frequency of migraine.Human brain mapping · 2020Article
- Migraine day frequency in migraine prevention: longitudinal modelling approaches.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Burden of Migraine in Europe Using Self-Reported Digital Diary Data from the Migraine Buddy© Application.Neurology and therapy · 2018Article
- Translation of the Child and Adolescent HARDSHIP (Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap and Impaired Participation) Questionnaire into the Lithuanian Language and Validation of Its HRQoL (Headache-Related Quality of Life) Scale.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of chronic cluster headache.The journal of headache and pain · 2016Article
- Rethinking headache chronification.Headache · 2013Review
- Influence of random measurement error on estimated rates of headache chronification and remission.Headache · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo characterize the extent of measurement error arising from rounding in headache frequency reporting (days per month) in a population sample of headache sufferers.
backgroundWhen reporting numerical health information, individuals tend to round their estimates. The tendency to round to the nearest 5 days when reporting headache frequency can distort distributions and engender unreliability in frequency estimates in both clinical and research contexts.
methodsThis secondary analysis of the 2005 American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study survey characterized the population distribution of 30-day headache frequency among community headache sufferers and determined the extent of numerical rounding ("heaping") in self-reported data. Headache frequency distributions (days per month) were examined using a simplified version of Wang and Heitjan's approach to heaping to estimate the probability that headache sufferers round to a multiple of 5 when providing frequency reports. Multiple imputation was used to estimate a theoretical "true" headache frequency.
resultsOf the 24,000 surveys, headache frequency data were available for 15,976 respondents diagnosed with migraine (68.6%), probable migraine (8.3%), or episodic tension-type headache (10.0%); the remainder had other headache types. The mean number of headaches days/month was 3.7 (standard deviation = 5.6). Examination of the distribution of headache frequency reports revealed a disproportionate number of responses centered on multiples of 5 days. The odds that headache frequency was rounded to 5 increased by 24% with each 1-day increase in headache frequency (odds ratio: 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 1.25), indicating that heaping occurs most commonly at higher headache frequencies. Women were more likely to round than men, and rounding decreased with increasing age and increased with symptoms of depression.
conclusionsBecause of the coarsening induced by rounding, caution should be used when distinguishing between episodic and chronic headache sufferers using self-reported estimates of headache frequency. Unreliability in frequency estimates is of particular concern among individuals with high-frequency (chronic) headache. Employing shorter recall intervals when assessing headache frequency, preferably using daily diaries, may improve accuracy and allow more precise estimation of chronic migraine onset and remission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.