Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34103978›Full record

ReviewJournal of pain research2021

Telemedicine Applications for the Evaluation of Patients with Non-Acute Headache: A Narrative Review.

Constantinos Dean Noutsios, Virginie Boisvert-Plante, Jordi Perez, Jonathan Hudon, Pablo Ingelmo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Telemedicine for headache disorders in real-world practice: from patient experience to health system impact.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Telemedicine in Headache Medicine: A Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Constantinos Dean NoutsiosFaculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Virginie Boisvert-PlanteFaculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8934-1458
Jordi PerezAlan Edwards Pain Management Unit. Montreal General Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jonathan HudonAlan Edwards Pain Management Unit. Montreal General Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Pablo IngelmoAlan Edwards Centre for Pain Research, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6888-0102
McGill University · CAMontreal Children's Hospital · CAMontreal General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a hasty transition to virtual care but also an abundance of new literature highlighting telehealth's capabilities and limitations for various healthcare applications. In this review, we aim to narrate the current state of the literature on telehealth applied to migraine care. First, telemedicine in the context of non-acute headache management has been shown to produce non-inferior patient outcomes when compared to traditional face-to-face appointments. The assignment of patients to telehealth appointments should be made after referring more urgent cases to dedicated in-person clinics. During the virtual appointment, physicians can ask their patients about the "3 F's" in order to perform a thorough assessment of their headaches: frequency of headache days, frequency of acute medication usage and functional impairment. Clinical assessment scores that have been studied and deemed feasible for telemedicine, safe and efficient include the HIT-6, VAS and MIDAS scores. Although MIDAS was found to be redundant and inadequate to use on a daily basis, we suggest that it can be useful in periodic remote follow-up appointments. Additionally, several mobile health apps have been studied including Migraine Buddy, Migraine Coach and Migraine Monitor. All of these are appropriate for use in telemedicine when combined with an adequate trial period with Migraine Buddy being rated the highest, as it captures the most detailed clinical picture. High satisfaction rates have been reported for virtual headache management which were shown to be equal to in-person consults. These are based on patients' perceived increase in convenience due to avoided travel time, less disruption of their daily routine and feeling more comfortable in the environment of their choice. Despite this, limitations such as technological knowledge, access to videoconferencing modalities and having a more impersonal consultation with the physician may hinder some patients from adopting this service.

Indexed as

evaluationheadachemHealthtele-assessmenttelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID34103978
PMCPMC8179807
OpenAlexW3169597343

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.