ArticleFrontiers in molecular neuroscience2023
Telemedicine efficacy and satisfaction of patients and headache specialists in migraine management.
Article in Frontiers in molecular neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2026Review
- Review
- Factors Impacting the Telephone Follow-Up Response Rate in Patients With Migraine Without Aura: A Cross-Sectional Study of 1299 Females.Pain research & management · 2026Article
- Telecoaching and Migraine: Digital Approach to Physical Activity in Migraine Management. A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Telemedicine for headache follow-up: feasibility, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported experience from a prospective study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Evolving migraine management: Lithuania's telemedicine experience.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Migraine follow-up is difficult for outpatients, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic, we tried to identify the most appropriate telemedicine methods for migraine in terms of efficacy, safety, patient compliance, and patient and physician satisfaction. Methods: Migraine patients were screened from the Headache Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from September 2019 to December 2021 and randomly classified into an outpatient group and four telemedicine groups: social software, telephone, E-mail, and short message. Headache specialists followed up with the patients 3 and 6 months after their visit and asked about their satisfaction with the follow-up in each instance, as were the headache specialists. Results: A total of 147 migraine patients were included, of whom 65 completed the follow-up. After 3 and 6 months of follow-up, the proportion of patients whose monthly headache frequency decreased by over 50% in the social-software, telephone, and E-mail groups was no different from that in the outpatient group. A similar result was obtained from evaluations with the Visual Analog Scale, the Headache Impact Test and the Migraine Disability Assessment compared with baseline in social software and telephone groups. The compliance in social-software group was not worse than that in the outpatient group. The proportion of patients in the E-mail group who completed the follow-up and the proportion of patients in the telephone group who consistently took preventive medication were significantly lower than those in the outpatient group. After 6 months, the majority of patients in the outpatient, social-software, and telephone groups and headache specialists in the outpatient, social-software groups were satisfied with the follow-up, while fewer patients in the E-mail group and fewer specialists in the telephone and E-mail group showed their satisfaction. Conclusion: Compared with outpatient visits, it is safe and effective to use social software and telephone to follow up on migraine patients, and E-mail and short-message follow-up have lower feasibility. Migraine patients prefer social-software and telephone follow-up, while specialists prefer social-software follow-up.
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.