ArticleTherapeutic advances in neurological disorders2025
Consulting, diagnosis and treatment patterns in migraine: results from the Migraine in Poland cross-sectional survey.
Article in Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders, 2025. 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.
- Characteristics and Treatment Patterns in People with Burden of Migraine: A Subgroup Analysis of the OVERCOME Japan 2nd Study.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- Innovative treatments for migraine: a new era.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2026Article
- Differences in Patient-Physician Satisfaction for Migraine Treatment Medications in Patients with and without Medication-Overuse Headache: A Cross-Sectional Real-World Survey.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
- Migraine in men - differences in phenotype and treatment patterns: results from the Migraine in Poland cross-sectional national survey.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Article
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Migraine in Poland study is a cross-sectional survey that assesses symptomatology, consulting, diagnosis, treatment and impact of migraine in Poland. Objectives: The purpose of this article is to define patterns of care for migraine in Polish patients. Methods: The survey was conducted from August 2021 to June 2022. Participants were recruited through various channels, targeting mostly persons suffering from headaches. The web survey included questions allowing for diagnosis according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders. A detailed questionnaire evaluated healthcare system utilization, history of diagnosis, as well as the use of acute or preventive treatment, including non-pharmacological methods. Results: In total, 3225 individuals aged 13-80 (mean age 38.9) responded to the questionnaire (87.1% were women). Migraine without aura (MwoA) diagnosis was confirmed in 1679 (52.7%) of subjects, and 1571 (93.6%) of them consulted a medical professional for their headaches in the past. Among those who consulted for headache, 91% reported having received a medical diagnosis of migraine. 92.5% of MwoA participants declared the current use of some form of treatment. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen were the most frequently used acute medications ( Conclusion: Despite high consultation and diagnosis rates among Polish patients with migraine, there is a need for improving standards of care, especially in regard to choice of treatment. There is also a need to raise public awareness of the dangers of codeine-based medications (available over-the-counter in Poland).
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.