Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38087219›Full record

ReviewThe journal of headache and pain2023

Health equity, care access and quality in headache - part 2.

Bianca Raffaelli, Eloísa Rubio-Beltrán, Soo-Jin Cho, Roberto De Icco, Alejandro Labastida-Ramirez, Dilara Onan, Raffaele Ornello, Ruth Ruscheweyh, Marta Waliszewska-Prosół, Roberta Messina and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The journal of headache and pain, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
15.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Sex-specific considerations in migraine therapy.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Bianca RaffaelliDepartment of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität Zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. bianca.raffaelli@charite.de.
Eloísa Rubio-BeltránHeadache Group, Wolfson SPaRC, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Soo-Jin ChoDepartment of Neurology, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Korea.
Roberto De IccoDepartment of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität Zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Alejandro Labastida-RamirezHeadache Group, Wolfson SPaRC, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Dilara OnanDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Yozgat Bozok University, Yozgat, Türkiye.
Raffaele OrnelloDepartment of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
Ruth RuscheweyhDepartment of Neurology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Marta Waliszewska-ProsółDepartment of Neurology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Roberta Messina *Neuroimaging Research Unit and Neurology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Francesca Puledda *Headache Group, Wolfson SPaRC, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBBozok Universitesi · TRFondazione Istituto Neurologico Nazionale Casimiro Mondino · ITHallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital · KRHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico San RaffaeleLMU Klinikum · DEUniversity of L'Aquila · ITWroclaw Medical University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHeadache disorders are a global public health concern affecting diverse populations. This review examines headache service organizations in low-, middle-, and high-income countries. It addresses global challenges in pharmacological headache treatment, with a focus on safety, tolerability, reproductive and child health, and outlines disparities in accessing innovative treatments worldwide. MAIN BODY: Organized headache services are essential due to the wide prevalence and varying severity of headache disorders. The tiered headache service model is globally recognized, although its implementation varies based on financial and workforce considerations. Headache burden affects well-being, causing disability, economic challenges, and work limitations, irrespective of location or income. All nations still require improved diagnosis and treatment, and the majority of countries face obstacles including limited access, awareness, economic barriers, and inadequate health policies. Provided adequate internet availability, telemedicine could help improve health equity by expanding access to headache care, since it can offer patients access to services without lengthy waiting times or extensive travel and can provide healthcare unavailable in underserved areas due to staff shortages. Numerous health disparities restrict global access to many headache medications, especially impacting individuals historically excluded from randomized controlled trials, such as those with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular conditions, as well as pregnant women. Furthermore, despite advancements in researching migraine treatments for young patients, the options for treatment remain limited. Access to headache treatment relies on factors like medication availability, approval, financial coverage, and healthcare provider expertise. Inadequate public awareness leads to neglect by policymakers and undertreatment by patients and healthcare providers. Global access discrepancies are exacerbated by the introduction of novel disease-specific medications, particularly impacting Asian, African, and Latin American nations excluded from clinical trials. While North America and Europe experience broad availability of migraine treatments, the majority of countries worldwide lack access to these therapies.

conclusionsHealthcare disparities, treatment access, and medication availability are concerning issues in headache medicine. Variations in national healthcare systems impact headache management, and costly innovative drugs are widening these gaps. Healthcare practitioners and experts should acknowledge these challenges and work towards minimizing access barriers for equitable global headache care in the future.

Indexed as

Health EquityMigraine DisordersPersons with DisabilitiesChildFemaleHeadacheHealth PersonnelHumansPregnancyAnti-CGRP drugsCluster headacheHealth inequityMedication overuseMigraineWorldwide health

Identifiers

PMID38087219
PMCPMC10717448
OpenAlexW4389639885

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.