RevieweNeurologicalSci2023
Advocacy for patients with headache disorders.
Review in eNeurologicalSci, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis challenges and accessibility barriers to migraine management in Southeast Asia: results from the South-East Asia Local breAch on MigraiNe Treatment (SEALANT) study.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
- Hallmarks of primary headache: part 3 - cluster headache.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Review
- Unravelling Migraine Stigma: A Comprehensive Review of Its Impact and Strategies for Change.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Improvement in diagnostic-therapeutic care pathways for women with migraine: an Italian Delphi panel.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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary headache disorders are worldwide highly prevalent and burdensome and should be therefore considered as a global public health priority. However, too many patients with primary headache disorders still do not receive satisfying care. The most likely identified reasons for such a scenario - lack of public awareness, stigma, lack of trained professionals with inadequate healthcare systems and policies - are remediable. Despite the progresses that were made in headache advocacy, these efforts have not yielded substantial improvements in research funding or access to specialty care and even standards of care. The situation is more complex in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs) where headache advocacy is urgently needed given the magnitude of the difficulties that patients with primary headache disorders face in accessing care. The growing emergence of coordinated, collaborative, patient-centered advocacy efforts with improved patient-clinician partnership is an opportunity to enhance progress in advocacy for a satisfying life and optimal and equitable care for people with primary headache disorders. LMICs can benefit greatly from coordinating these efforts on a global scale. The recent organization of a training program on headache diagnosis and management for healthcare professionals in Africa is a concrete example.
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.