ArticleBMC neurology2024
Migraine treatment: quo vadis? Real-world data study (2015-2022) in Spain.
Article in BMC neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Utilization and Treatment Gaps in People with Migraine in Japan: Results from the OVERCOME (Japan) 2nd Study.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2026Article
- Trends in migraine-specific medication consumption: a multinational analysis of 73 countries based on IQVIA-MIDAS database, 2015 to 2024.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
- Prescriber adherence to treatment guidelines for monoclonal antibodies against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide in migraine prophylaxis - a register-based cohort study.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
- [CefaleApp: A Mobile Application for Migraine Diagnosis in Primary Health Care].Revista de neurologia · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a patient-reported-experience measure to ascertain treatment satisfaction in migraine: the MISAT-Q questionnaire.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- Exploring the professional and personal impact of migraine: a cross-sectional study in Greece.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2025Article
- Prevalence, disability, and economic impact of migraine in Spain: a nationwide population-based study.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Article
- Differences in pharmacological migraine treatment across different levels of clinical headache care - a cross-sectional study.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Observational
- Migraine epidemiology, comorbidities and therapeutic landscape: a national population-based study.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMigraine is a leading cause of disability, estimated to affect one-in-ten people in Spain. This study aimed to describe the management of migraine in Spain and identify improvement areas.
methodsNon-interventional, retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study conducted using an electronic medical records database covering visits to public healthcare providers for 3% of the Spanish population. Patients with a migraine diagnosis (ICD-9 346) between 01/2015 and 04/2022 were included, as well as their demographic and clinical characteristics, prescribed migraine treatments and the specialty of the prescribing physicians.
resultsThe database included 61,204 patients diagnosed with migraine. A migraine treatment had been prescribed to 50.6% of patients over the last 24 months (only acute to 69.5%, both acute and preventive to 24.2%, and only preventive to 6.3%). The most frequently prescribed treatments were NSAIDs (56.3%), triptans (44.1%) and analgesics (28.9%). Antidepressants were the most common preventive treatment (prescribed to 17.9% of all treated patients and 58.7% of those treated with a preventive medication), and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies the least prescribed (1.7%; 5.7%). In 13.4% of cases, preventive medications were the first treatment: alone in 5.8% of cases and together with an acute medication in 7.6%. A fifth of patients who were initially prescribed with only acute treatment were later prescribed a preventive medication (20.7%). On average, it took 29.4 months for this change to occur. Two-thirds of patients started their preventive treatment in primary care (64.2%). The percentage of patients treated by a neurologist increased with the number of received preventive medications. However, 28.8% of patients who had already been prescribed five or more distinct preventive treatments were not treated by a neurologist. Migraine patients had between 1.2- and 2.2-times higher prevalence of comorbidities than the general population, age-gender adjusted.
conclusionsOur study emphasizes the need for improved management of migraine in Spain to reduce the risk of chronification and improve patient outcomes. More training and coordination across healthcare professionals is necessary to recognize and address risk factors for migraine progression, including multiple associated comorbidities and several lines of treatment, and to provide personalized treatment plans that address the complex nature of the condition.
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.