ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2016
Headache service quality: evaluation of quality indicators in 14 specialist-care centres.
Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Headache-attributed burden among children and adolescents in Georgia: estimates from a national cross-sectional schools-based study.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
- Healthcare providers' perspectives on headache care in Azerbaijan: results of a national cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Migraine management in Chinese headache centers: a national survey and the role of quality control inspections.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Article
- The Global Campaign against Headache, aged 21: a critical self-appraisal, and plans for phase 2.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Article
- Psychopathological variables in chronic migraine patients with different therapeutic approach: psychological profile differences and impact on therapeutic efficacy in real life.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Accuracy of migraine diagnosis and treatment by neurologists in the Baltic states: e-survey with clinical case challenge.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- The Global Campaign turns 18: a brief review of its activities and achievements.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Review
- What is the value and impact of the adaptation process on quality indicators for local use? A scoping review.PloS one · 2022Article
- Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache. 3. Modelling effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementation in Europe: findings and conclusions.The journal of headache and pain · 2021Article
- Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache: 1. Rationale and descriptionThe journal of headache and pain · 2021Article
- Headache service quality evaluation: implementation of quality indicators in primary care in Europe.The journal of headache and pain · 2021Article
- Management of Migraine and the Accessibility of Specialist Care: Findings from an Extended Multinational Survey (My Migraine Center Survey).Neurology and therapy · 2020Article
- Proposal of a clinical care pathway for quality and safe management of headache patients: a consensus study report.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Quality assurance in specialized headache units in Spain: an observational prospective study.The journal of headache and pain · 2019Observational
- Headache service quality: the role of specialized headache centres within structured headache services, and suggested standards and criteria as centres of excellence.The journal of headache and pain · 2019Review
- Efficacy of combination of Viola odorata, Rosa damascena and Coriandrum sativum in prevention of migraine attacks: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.Electronic physician · 2018Article
- The Headache-Attributed Lost Time (HALT) Indices: measures of burden for clinical management and population-based research.The journal of headache and pain · 2018Article
- Dietary trigger factors of migraine and tension-type headache in a South East Asian country.Journal of pain research · 2018Article
- Quality indicators in headache care: an implementation study in six Italian specialist-care centres.The journal of headache and pain · 2017Article
- A Critical Evaluation on MOH Current Treatments.Current treatment options in neurology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors at 14 institutions in 12 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe study was a collaboration between Lifting The Burden (LTB) and the European Headache Federation (EHF). Its aim was to evaluate the implementation of quality indicators for headache care Europe-wide in specialist headache centres (level-3 according to the EHF/LTB standard).
methodsEmploying previously-developed instruments in 14 such centres, we made enquiries, in each, of health-care providers (doctors, nurses, psychologists, physiotherapists) and 50 patients, and analysed the medical records of 50 other patients. Enquiries were in 9 domains: diagnostic accuracy, individualized management, referral pathways, patient's education and reassurance, convenience and comfort, patient's satisfaction, equity and efficiency of the headache care, outcome assessment and safety.
resultsOur study showed that highly experienced headache centres treated their patients in general very well. The centres were content with their work and their patients were content with their treatment. Including disability and quality-of-life evaluations in clinical assessments, and protocols regarding safety, proved problematic: better standards for these are needed. Some centres had problems with follow-up: many specialised centres operated in one-touch systems, without possibility of controlling long-term management or the success of treatments dependent on this.
conclusionsThis first Europe-wide quality study showed that the quality indicators were workable in specialist care. They demonstrated common trends, producing evidence of what is majority practice. They also uncovered deficits that might be remedied in order to improve quality. They offer the means of setting benchmarks against which service quality may be judged. The next step is to take the evaluation process into non-specialist care (EHF/LTB levels 1 and 2).
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.