Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35193489›Full record

ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2022

TIME, to move forward? comment on "a universal outcome measure for headache treatments, care-delivery systems and economic analysis".

Raquel Gil-Gouveia

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 55% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Raquel Gil-GouveiaHospital da Luz Headache Center, Lisboa. Avenida Lusíada nº 100, 1500-650, Lisboa, Portugal. rgilgouveia@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4256-4256
Universidade Católica Portuguesa · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The paper from Steiner et al. suggests that an outcome measure expressed in time units may be an adequate method to assess the impact of headache disorders, regardless of diagnosis or health care setting, proving useful for cost-benefit analysis and health policy definition. Using time lost to each attack - weighted by disability - may prove to be a reliable measure to establish the effectiveness of acute treatment, but if considering also the attack frequency it could evaluate the effects of preventive strategies. A measure such as the Headache Gauge, which translates the proportion of time lost to headache -related disability, has proven to be applicable also in routine clinical practice as well, and can be tested in clinical trials and populational analysis. There are practical limitations, such as disability assessment and the need for prospective data collection to avoid recall bias but it seems consensual that impairment related to primary headache disorders is primarily driven by the TIME stolen from the perfect health status.

Indexed as

HeadacheHeadache DisordersCost-Benefit AnalysisData CollectionHumansOutcome Assessment, Health Care

Identifiers

PMID35193489
PMCPMC8903664
OpenAlexW4213330828

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.