ArticlePeerJ2022
A decision support system for primary headache developed through machine learning.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 'Man vs. Machine: can ML algorithms diagnose headaches as accurately as clinicians? A systematic review.'Journal of neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in headache medicine: between automation and the doctor-patient relationship. A systematic review.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in migraine: a narrative review on the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic applications.Oxford open neuroscience · 2026Article
- Clinical Prediction of Posttreatment Migraine Recurrence Using Biofeedback Data: A Machine Learning Framework for Enhanced Patient Stratification and Treatment Monitoring.BioMed research international · 2026Article
- Real-world evidence on migraine treatment in routine clinical practice: insights from the Türkiye migraine registry study using artificial intelligence algorithms.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Observational
- Validation of an AI-Based platform for structured diagnosis of headache disorders using ICHD-3 criteria.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- A nomogram for the prediction of response to anti-CGRP mAbs: the CGRP score.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Article
- The Ethical Stewardship of Artificial Intelligence in Chronic Pain and Headache: A Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2024Review
- Article
- Migraine headache (MH) classification using machine learning methods with data augmentation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The Clinical Relevance of Artificial Intelligence in Migraine.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Verification of a clinical decision support system for the diagnosis of headache disorders based on patient-computer interactions: a multi-center study.The journal of headache and pain · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Aided Headache Classification Based on a Set of Questionnaires: A Short Review.Cureus · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary headache is a disorder with a high incidence and low diagnostic accuracy; the incidence of migraine and tension-type headache ranks first among primary headaches. Artificial intelligence (AI) decision support systems have shown great potential in the medical field. Therefore, we attempt to use machine learning to build a clinical decision-making system for primary headaches.
methodsThe demographic data and headache characteristics of 173 patients were collected by questionnaires. Decision tree, random forest, gradient boosting algorithm and support vector machine (SVM) models were used to construct a discriminant model and a confusion matrix was used to calculate the evaluation indicators of the models. Furthermore, we have carried out feature selection through univariate statistical analysis and machine learning.
resultsIn the models, the accuracy, F1 score were calculated through the confusion matrix. The logistic regression model has the best discrimination effect, with the accuracy reaching 0.84 and the area under the ROC curve also being the largest at 0.90. Furthermore, we identified the most important factors for distinguishing the two disorders through statistical analysis and machine learning: nausea/vomiting and photophobia/phonophobia. These two factors represent potential independent factors for the identification of migraines and tension-type headaches, with the accuracy reaching 0.74 and the area under the ROC curve being at 0.74.
conclusionsApplying machine learning to the decision-making system for primary headaches can achieve a high diagnostic accuracy. Among them, the discrimination effect obtained by the integrated algorithm is significantly better than that of a single learner. Second, nausea/vomiting, photophobia/phonophobia may be the most important factors for distinguishing migraine from tension-type headaches.
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.