Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37833507›Full record

Observational studyNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Profiling migraine patients according to clinical and psychophysical characteristics: clinical validity of distinct migraine clusters.

Stefano Di Antonio, Lars Arendt-Nielsen, Marta Ponzano, Francesca Bovis, Paola Torelli, Pelosin Elisa, Cinzia Finocchi, Matteo Castaldo

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Hallmarks of primary headache: part 1 - migraine.The journal of headache and pain · 2024
    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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Stefano Di AntonioDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Center for Pain and Neuroplasticity (CNAP), School of Medicine, SMI, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Lars Arendt-NielsenDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Center for Pain and Neuroplasticity (CNAP), School of Medicine, SMI, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Marta PonzanoDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), Section of Biostatistics, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Francesca BovisDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), Section of Biostatistics, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Paola TorelliHeadache Centre, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Pelosin ElisaDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics and Maternal Child Health, Genoa, Italy.
Cinzia FinocchiOspedale San Paolo, ASL 2 Savonese, Savona, Italy.
Matteo CastaldoDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Center for Pain and Neuroplasticity (CNAP), School of Medicine, SMI, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. matteo.castaldo@poliambulatoriofisiocenter.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2427-720X
Aalborg University · DKUniversity of Genoa · ITOspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITOspedale San Paolo · ITSteno Diabetes Centers · DKUniversity of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsInvestigate if different clinical and psychophysical bedside tools can differentiate between district migraine phenotypes in ictal/perictal (cohort 1) and interictal (cohort 2) phases.

methodThis observational study included two independent samples in which patients were subgrouped into distinct clusters using standardized bedside assessment tools (headache frequency, disability, cervical active range of motion, pressure pain threshold in different areas): (A) cohort 1-ictal/perictal migraine patients were subgrouped, based on previous studies, into two clusters, i.e., Cluster-1.1 No Psychophysical Impairments (NPI) and Cluster-1.2 Increased Pain Sensitivity and Cervical Musculoskeletal Dysfunction (IPS-CMD); (B) cohort 2-interictal migraine patients were subgrouped into three clusters, i.e., Cluster-2.1 NPI, Cluster-2.2 IPS, and Cluster-2.3 IPS-CMD. Clinical characteristics (multiple questionnaires), somatosensory function (comprehensive quantitative sensory testing (QST)), and cervical musculoskeletal impairments (cervical musculoskeletal assessment) were assessed and compared across headache clusters and a group of 56 healthy controls matched for sex and age.

resultsCohort 1: A total of 156 subjects were included. Cluster-1.2 (IPS-CMD) had higher headache intensity (p = 0.048), worse headache-related (p = 0.003) and neck-related disability (p = 0.005), worse quality of life (p = 0.003), and higher symptoms related to sensitization (p = 0.001) and psychological burden (p = 0.005) vs. Cluster-1.1(NPI). Furthermore, Cluster-1.2 (IPS-CMD) had (1) reduced cervical active and passive range of motion (p < 0.023), reduced functionality of deep cervical flexors (p < 0.001), and reduced values in all QST(p < 0.001) vs. controls, and (2) reduced active mobility in flexion, left/right lateral flexion (p < 0.045), and reduced values in QST (p < 0.001) vs. Cluster-1.1 (NPI). Cohort 2: A total of 154 subjects were included. Cluster-2.3 (IPS-CMD) had (1) longer disease duration (p = 0.006), higher headache frequency (p = 0.006), disability (p < 0.001), and psychological burden (p = 0.027) vs. Cluster-2.2 (IPS) and (2) higher headache-related disability (p = 0.010), neck-related disability (p = 0.009), and higher symptoms of sensitization (p = 0.018) vs. Cluster-2.1 (NPI). Cluster-2.3(IPS-CMD) had reduced cervical active and passive range of motion (p < 0.034), and reduced functionality of deep cervical flexors (p < 0.001), vs. controls, Custer-2.1 (NPI), and Cluster-2.2 (IPS). Cluster-2.2 (IPS) and 2.3 (IPS-CMD) had reduced QST values vs. controls (p < 0.001) and Cluster-2.1 (p < 0.039).

conclusionA battery of patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) and quantitative bedside tools can separate migraine clusters with different clinical characteristics, somatosensory functions, and cervical musculoskeletal impairments. This confirms the existence of distinct migraine phenotypes and emphasizes the importance of migraine phases of which the characteristics are assessed. This may have implications for responders and non-responders to anti-migraine medications.

Indexed as

Migraine DisordersQuality of LifeHeadacheHumansNeckRange of Motion, ArticularCervical musculoskeletal impairmentsMigrainePhenotypesPrecision medicineQuantitative sensory testing

Identifiers

PMID37833507
PMCPMC10858147
OpenAlexW4387609262

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.