Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24083117›Full record

ArticleSpringerPlus2013

Atenolol in the prophylaxis of chronic migraine: a 3-month open-label study.

Bengt Edvardsson

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SpringerPlus, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Outcome of Chronic Daily Headache or Chronic Migraine.Current pain and headache reports · 2016
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Tackling chronic migraine: current perspectives.Journal of pain research · 2014
    Review
  6. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bengt EdvardssonDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Skane University Hospital, S-221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Skåne University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic migraine (CM) is a type of chronic daily headache. CM presents a challenge to primary care physicians and neurologists. Any new treatment showing efficiency would therefore be of great importance. Atenolol together with other beta-blockers is a first-line choice in episodic migraine prophylaxis. Clinical findings support the efficacy of atenolol in doses of 50 to 200 mg/day.

methodsHere I present an open-label study the aim of which is to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of atenolol (50 mg o.d) for the prevention of CM. 19 patients affected by CM were studied.

resultsFollowing a one-month run-in period, the patients took atenolol for 3 months. Mean numbers of headache days per month were reduced from 20.1 ± 2.4 during the run-in period to 7.8 ± 6.1 by month 1.5 and to 7.1 ± 5.7 by the 3rd month of treatment (p < 0.0003). There was a significant difference between 1.5 months and the 3rd month (p < 0.006). The severity of attacks was reduced from a mean 2.3 ± 0.6 to 1.4 ± 1.1 (p < 0.010) at 1.5 months. In this, there was no difference between 1.5 months and the 3rd month. In 5 (29%) of the17 patients who completed the study, CM was totally gone during the 3rd month of treatment. No patient was totally unresponsive to the drug. Among the patients who completed the study, the treatment was well tolerated and the compliance was good.

conclusionAtenolol seems to be a safe and effective treatment for CM. Controlled trials are needed to confirm the observed results.

Indexed as

AtenololBeta blockersChronic daily headacheChronic migraineHeadacheMigraine

Identifiers

PMID24083117
PMCPMC3786076
OpenAlexW2146670337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.