ArticleAnnals of Indian Academy of Neurology2026
Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices of General Neurologists and Headache Experts Toward Migraine Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Study in India.
Article in Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesMigraine, a disabling neurological disorder, poses a significant global burden, especially among women of reproductive age. In India, inconsistent diagnoses and the underutilization of evidence-based therapies present substantial challenges. This study evaluated the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of general neurologists and headache experts in India regarding migraine diagnosis and treatment, identifying barriers and opportunities for improvement in clinical care.
methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 137 clinicians in India (125 general neurologists and 12 headache experts). The questionnaire assessed diagnostic approaches, preferences for pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments, utilization of guidelines, and readiness to adopt novel therapies. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
resultsHeadache experts reported a higher patient burden, with 9 (75.00%) seeing 25 or more headache patients per week, compared to 39 (31.2%) general neurologists. Migraines comprised over 50% of cases for 7 (58.33%) of the experts. The use of International Classification of Headache Disorders (3 rd edition) criteria was markedly higher among headache experts (91.67% vs. 38.71%), as was the Migraine Disability Assessment (66.67% vs. 24.20%). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and triptans were the most commonly prescribed therapies. Although triptans provided only moderate relief for most patients, newer agents, such as ditans, were rarely used (0-20%). Nonpharmacological interventions were widely adopted, with approximately 90% usage in both groups. Barriers included limited diagnostic standardization, therapeutic inertia, low familiarity with newer agents, and operational challenges such as time constraints.
conclusionsBoth general neurologists and headache experts acknowledge the burden of migraine and practice holistic management. However, gaps remain in standardized diagnosis, optimal triptan use, and the adoption of novel therapies. Enhancing clinician education, promoting validated diagnostic tools, developing expert consensus, and increasing community awareness are crucial to optimizing outcomes and reducing therapeutic inertia.
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.