Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30621592›Full record

ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2019

Development and validation of a telephone classification interview for common chronic headache disorders.

Rachel Potter, Siew Wan Hee, Frances Griffiths, Katherine Dodd, Eleanor Hoverd, Martin Underwood, Manjit Matharu

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel PotterWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. r.potter@warwick.ac.uk.
Siew Wan HeeDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Frances GriffithsDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Katherine DoddWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Eleanor HoverdDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Martin UnderwoodWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Manjit MatharuHeadache Group, UCL Institute of Neurology and The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, WC1N 3BG, UK.
University of Warwick · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1212-20018National Institute for Health Research RP-PG-1212-20018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor a trial of supportive self-management for people with chronic headache we needed to develop and validate a telephone classification interview that can be used by a non-headache specialist to classify common chronic headache types in primary care. We aimed to specifically: exclude secondary headaches other than medication overuse, exclude primary headache disorders other than migraine and tension type headache (TTH), distinguish between chronic migraine and chronic TTH, and identify medication overuse headache.

methodsWe held a headache classification consensus conference to draw on evidence and expertise to inform the content of a logic model underpinning the classification interview. Nurses trained to use the logic model did telephone classification interviews with participants recruited from primary care. Doctors specialising in headache did a second validation interview.

resultsTwenty-six delegates attended the headache classification conference including headache specialist doctors, nurses and lay representatives (with chronic headache). We trained six nurses to do the classification interviews and completed 107 paired interviews, median days between interviews was 32 days (interquartile range 21-48 days). We measured level of agreement between the nurse and doctor interviews using proportion of concordance, simple kappa and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). Proportion of concordance of agreement between nurse and doctor interviews was 0.76, simple kappa coefficient κ 0.31 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.52), and PABAK 0.51 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.68), a moderate agreement. In a sensitivity test following review of headache characteristics recorded, concordance was 0.91, κ = 0.53 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.79), and PABAK = 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.92), a very good agreement.

conclusionWe developed and validated a new evidence-based telephone classification interview that can be used by a non-headache specialist to classify common chronic headache types in primary care.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHeadache DisordersHumansInterviews as TopicMaleChronic headacheClassificationDevelopmentPrimary careTelephone interviewsValidation

Identifiers

PMID30621592
PMCPMC6734413
OpenAlexW2939257103

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.