Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28721092›Full record

ReviewJournal of pain research2017

Hemicrania continua: clinical review, diagnosis and management.

Sanjay Prakash, Payal Patel

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Hemicrania continua with rhinosinusitis: a case report.Korean journal of family medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Hemicrania Continua: An Update.Current pain and headache reports · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Hemicrania Continua: a Clinical Perspective on Diagnosis and Management.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2018
    Review
  14. Hemicrania Continua.Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology · 2018
    Review
  15. 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.

Sanjay PrakashDepartment of Neurology, Smt. B. K. Shah Medical Institute and Research Centre, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.
Payal PatelDepartment of Neurology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hemicrania continua (HC) is an indomethacin-responsive primary headache disorder which is currently classified under the heading of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs). It is a highly misdiagnosed and underreported primary headache. The pooled mean delay of diagnosis of HC is 8.0 ± 7.2 years. It is not rare. We noted more than 1000 cases in the literature. It represents 1.7% of total headache patients attending headache or neurology clinic. Just like other TACs, it is characterized by strictly unilateral pain in the trigeminal distribution, cranial autonomic features in the same area and agitation during exacerbations/attacks. It is different from other TACs in one aspect. While all other TACs are episodic, HC patients have continuous headaches with superimposed severe exacerbations. The central feature of HC is continuous background headache. However, the patients may be worried only for superimposed exacerbations. Focusing only on exacerbations and ignoring continuous background headache are the most important factors for the misdiagnosis of HC. A large number of patients may have migrainous features during exacerbation phase. Up to 70% patients may fulfill the diagnostic criteria for migraine during exacerbations. Besides migraine, its exacerbations can mimic a large number of other primary and secondary headaches. The other specific feature of HC is a remarkable response to indomethacin. However, a large number of patients develop side effects because of the long-term use of indomethacin. A few other medications may also be effective in a subset of patients with HC. Various surgical interventions have been suggested for patients who are intolerant to indomethacin. Several aspects of HC are still not defined. There is a great heterogeneity in types of patients or articles on the HC in the literature. Diagnostic criteria have been modified several times over the years. The current diagnostic criteria are too restrictive in some aspects. We suggest a more accommodating type of criteria for the appendix of International Classification of Headache Disorder (ICHD).

Indexed as

indomethacinindomethacin-responsive headacheside-locked headachetrigeminal autonomic cephalalgias

Identifiers

PMID28721092
PMCPMC5499960
OpenAlexW2727665903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.