Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39363297›Full record

SynthesisThe journal of headache and pain2024

Prediction models for identifying medication overuse or medication overuse headache in migraine patients: a systematic review.

Teerapong Aramruang, Akshita Malhotra, Pawin Numthavaj, Panu Looareesuwan, Thunyarat Anothaisintawee, Charungthai Dejthevaporn, Nat Sirirutbunkajorn, John Attia, Ammarin Thakkinstian

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The journal of headache and pain, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Teerapong AramruangDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Akshita MalhotraUniversity College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Pawin NumthavajDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. pawin.num@mahidol.edu.
Panu LooareesuwanDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thunyarat AnothaisintaweeDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Charungthai DejthevapornDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nat SirirutbunkajornDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Radiology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
John AttiaCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Ammarin ThakkinstianDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

The National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) N42A640323
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMigraine is a debilitating neurological disorder that presents significant management challenges, resulting in underdiagnosis and inappropriate treatments, leaving patients at risk of medication overuse (MO). MO contributes to disease progression and the development of medication overuse headache (MOH). Predicting which migraine patients are at risk of MO/MOH is crucial for effective management. Thus, this systematic review aims to review and critique available prediction models for MO/MOH in migraine patients.

methodsA systematic search was conducted using Embase, Scopus, Medline/PubMed, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE databases from inception to April 22, 2024. The risk of bias was assessed using the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool.

resultsOut of 1,579 articles, six studies with nine models met the inclusion criteria. Three studies developed new prediction models, while the remaining validated existing scores. Most studies utilized cross-sectional and prospective data collection in specific headache settings and migraine types. The models included up to 53 predictors, with sample sizes from 17 to 1,419 participants. Traditional statistical models (logistic regression and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression) were used in two studies, while one utilized a machine learning (ML) technique (support vector machines). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was employed to validate existing scores. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) for the ML model (0.83) outperformed the traditional statistical model (0.62) in internal validation. The AUROCs ranged from 0.84 to 0.85 for the validation of existing scores. Common predictors included age and gender; genetic data and questionnaire evaluations were also included. All studies demonstrated a high risk of bias in model construction and high concerns regarding applicability to participants.

conclusionThis review identified promising results for MO/MOH prediction models in migraine patients, although the field remains limited. Future research should incorporate important risk factors, assess discrimination and calibration, and perform external validation. Further studies with robust designs, appropriate settings, high-quality and quantity data, and rigorous methodologies are necessary to advance this field.

Indexed as

Headache Disorders, SecondaryMigraine DisordersHumansModels, StatisticalMachine learningMedication overuseMedication overuse headacheMigrainePrediction modelSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39363297
PMCPMC11450990

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.