ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Clinical decision support system using hierarchical fuzzy diagnosis model for migraine and tension-type headache based on International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Abnormal baseline brain activity in migraine without aura with versus without patent foramen ovale: a resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Methodology and baseline characteristics of the China Migraine registry (CHIME): a nationwide, multi-center, prospective cohort study of 11,814 patients.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Observational
- Validation of an AI-Based platform for structured diagnosis of headache disorders using ICHD-3 criteria.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- The Emerging Clinical Relevance of Artificial Intelligence, Data Science, and Wearable Devices in Headache: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Fuzzy logic nursing tool for early acute kidney injury detection in surgical patients.Frontiers in nephrology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether the diagnostic ability of the newly designed hierarchical fuzzy diagnosis method is consistent with that of headache experts for probable migraine (PM) and probable tension-type headache (PTTH). Background: Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are computer systems designed to help doctors to make clinician decisions by information technology, and have proven to be effective in improving headache diagnosis by making medical knowledge readily available to users in some studies. However, one serious drawback is that the CDSS lacks the ability to deal with some fuzzy boundaries of the headache features utilized in diagnostic criteria, which might be caused by patients' recall bias and subjective bias. Methods: A hybrid mechanism of rule-based reasoning and hierarchical fuzzy diagnosis method based on International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3) was designed and then validated by a retrospective study with 325 consecutive patients and a prospective study with 380 patients who were clinically diagnosed with migraine and TTH at the headache clinic of Chinese PLA General Hospital. Results: The results of the diagnostic test in the retrospective study indicated that the fuzzy-based CDSS can be used in the diagnosis of migraine without aura (MO) (sensitivity 97.71%, specificity 100%), TTH (sensitivity 98.57%, specificity 100%), PM (sensitivity 91.25%, specificity 98.75%) and PTTH (sensitivity 90.91%, specificity 99.63%). While in the prospective study, the diagnostic performances were MO (sensitivity 91.62%, specificity 96.52%), TTH (sensitivity 92.17%, specificity 95.47%), PM (sensitivity 85.48%, specificity 98.11%) and PTTH (sensitivity 87.50%, specificity 98.60%). Cohen's kappa values for the consistency test were 0.984 ± 0.018 (MO), 0.991 ± 0.018 (TTH), 0.916 ± 0.051 (PM), 0.932 ± 0.059 (PTTH) in the retrospective study and 0.884 ± 0.047 (MO), 0.870 ± 0.055 (TTH), 0.853 ± 0.073 (PM), 0.827 ± 0.118 (PTTH) in the prospective study, which indicated good consistency with the fuzzy-based CDSS and the gold standard ( Conclusion: We developed a fuzzy-based CDSS performs much more similarly to expert diagnosis and performs better than the routine CDSS method in the diagnosis of migraine and TTH, and it could promote the application of artificial intelligence in the area of headache diagnosis.
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.