ArticleBJGP open2025
Assessment and treatment of headache in primary care: a scoping review.
Article in BJGP open, 2025. 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.
- Patients' experiences with a nurse-led transmural headache care pathway: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Bridging the gap in headache care: a qualitative needs assessment for primary care education in Indonesia.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGood quality primary care is essential for the assessment and treatment of headache but there is evidence that primary care for headache is suboptimal.
aimTo identify the international evidence on the assessment and treatment of headache in adults in primary care. DESIGN &
settingA scoping review of the published literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR) guidelines, and a narrative review of the evidence.
methodAn electronic search of MEDLINE and Embase (1974-2024) was undertaken. Studies meeting the eligibility criteria were included. Results were grouped by study type and were reported narratively.
resultsIn total, 1125 articles were screened, 43 articles underwent full-text review, and 28 articles were included in the final review. Six studies used comparative methods, of which
conclusionDespite the availability of high quality clinical guidelines on the assessment and management of headache, the evidence shows that its implementation in primary care is problematic and educational interventions are a common focus of published studies. Further research is required to assess the quality of the current evidence and to develop, refine, and deploy interventions that have a signal of efficacy.
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.