Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35528230›Full record

ArticleBrain communications2022

Machine prescription for chronic migraine.

Anker Stubberud, Robert Gray, Erling Tronvik, Manjit Matharu, Parashkev Nachev

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Intelligent Digital Twins for Personalized Migraine Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Anker StubberudHeadache and Facial Pain Group, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology and National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0934-9914
Robert GrayHigh Dimensional Neurology Group, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology and National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.
Erling TronvikDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Sciences, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Manjit MatharuHeadache and Facial Pain Group, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology and National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4960-2294
Parashkev NachevHigh Dimensional Neurology Group, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology and National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2718-4423
National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery · GBNorwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Responsive to treatment individually, chronic migraine remains strikingly resistant collectively, incurring the second-highest population burden of disability worldwide. A heterogeneity of responsiveness, requiring prolonged-currently heuristic-individual evaluation of available treatments, may reflect a diversity of causal mechanisms, or the failure to identify the most important, single causal factor. Distinguishing between these possibilities, now possible through the application of complex modelling to large-scale data, is critical to determine the optimal approach to identify new interventions in migraine and making the best use of existing ones. Examining a richly phenotyped cohort of 1446 consecutive unselected patients with chronic migraine, here we use causal multitask Gaussian process models to estimate individual treatment effects across 10 classes of preventatives. Such modelling enables us to quantify the accessibility of heterogeneous responsiveness to high-dimensional modelling, to infer the likely scale of the underlying causal diversity. We calculate the treatment effects in the overall population, and the conditional treatment effects among those modelled to respond and compare the true response rates between these two groups. Identifying a difference in response rates between the groups supports a diversity of causal mechanisms. Moreover, we propose a data-driven machine prescription policy, estimating the time-to-response when sequentially trialling preventatives by individualized treatment effects and comparing it to expert guideline sequences. All model performances are quantified out-of-sample. We identify significantly higher true response rates among individuals modelled to respond, compared with the overall population (mean difference of 0.034; 95% confidence interval 0.003-0.065;

Indexed as

heterogeneous treatment effectsmachine learningprescriptive inference

Identifiers

PMID35528230
PMCPMC9070525
OpenAlexW4226419661

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.