ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
A Study of the Effect of Treatment On the Clinical Profile, Pain, and Disability in Migraine Patients Seen in a Tertiary Hospital.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response to Article "A Study of the Effect of Treatment on the Clinical Profile, Pain, and Disability in Migraine Patients Seen in a Tertiary Hospital" [Letter].Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- A Study of the Effect of Treatment on the Clinical Profile, Pain, and Disability in Migraine Patients Seen in a Tertiary Hospital [Response to Letter].Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Migraine is a disabling disease that poses a significant societal burden. Migraine is a major cause of disability. Migraine is the eighth leading disease-causing disability in the population. Objective: To study the clinical profile and measure the pain and migraine-related disability of patients with all types of migraine using the McGill pain assessment scale and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) before and after 3 months of effect on the medication. Methods: A Prospective-Cross sectional study was carried out in a multispecialty hospital with male and female patients between 18 and 65 years. The data were collected from the patients directly through the questionnaire of McGill pain assessment scale-short form (SF) and MIDAS, which was provided before and after the medication. Results: There were 165 subjects of which 52 were men and 113 were women. The mean age of all the subjects was 43 years. About 26.06% of the subjects had a family history of headaches. The scores of McGill pain and MIDAS assessment before and after medication were as follows: 0-15 were 30.90% and 73.33%, Score 16-30 were 54.54% and 18.18%, the score of 31-45 were 14.54% and 7.87% of the subjects. MIDAS grade I was 17.57% and 50.90%, Grade II 33.93% and 21.81%, Grade III 30.30% and 15.75% Grade IV 18.18% and 11.51% of the subjects. Discussion: The calculated "t" value between the before and after medication values of McGill and MIDAS by paired ' Conclusion: This study confirms that there is a significant difference in disability levels before and after acute and preventative treatments when measured over 3 months. In addition, the preponderance of females was high, and the functional disability that affects work and social activity associated with migraine is moderate to severe.
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.