ArticleScientific reports2025
Results of upper cervical palpation test in migraine patients are not explained by pain sensitization.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The exact cause for no pain, local pain and referred pain groups according to the upper cervical palpation test (UPT) and whether neck pain in migraine patients is caused due to pain sensitization or influenced by perceived neck-related disability, is not fully understood. The aim was to determine whether upper cervical spine sensitivity tested by the UPT is associated with neck-related disability or increased pain sensitization in patients with migraine. Forty-two patients with episodic migraine were examined regarding mechanical and pressure pain thresholds, central sensitization (CSI), allodynia (ASC-12) and neck-related disability (NDI), and sub-grouped according to the UPT. An ANOVA analysis was performed for group differences. Exploratory regression and correlation analyses were performed with NDI and CSI as dependent variables to understand which factors are related and contribute to either subgroup allocation. No significant differences were found in UPT subgroups regarding CSI and NDI. The UPT subgroups could not be determined by any evaluated variable. The NDI was explained in 43.6% by the CSI and neck pain intensity. CSI results were explained to 49.4% by a model including ASC-12 and NDI. In conclusion, UPT subgroups were neither explained by differences in CSI, mechanical or pressure threshold testing or NDI.
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.