ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2026
Profile of migraine patients in Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region: a multi-center study.
Article in The journal of headache and pain, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region presents a unique demographic, cultural, and socioeconomic profile that influence migraine burden and management. Comprehensive multicenter data on patient characteristics, treatment access, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in this region are limited. The aim of this work was to compare sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of migraine patients in low-/lower-middle-income countries (LICs/LMICs) versus high-/upper-middle-income countries (HICs/UMICs) in the MENA region, and to explore disparities in medication access, treatment adherence, patient satisfaction, and CAM use.
methodsThis cross-sectional multicenter study included 676 adult migraine patients across 12 MENA countries. Data were collected via structured interviews and medical record verification, covering sociodemographic, lifestyle, clinical, and treatment-related variables, as well as knowledge, attitudes, and experiences with CAM.
resultsPatients from LICs/LMICs had significantly longer delays from headache onset to diagnosis compared with those from HICs/UMICs [6 (3-9) vs. 1 (0-3) years; effect size = 1.344, 95% CI: 1.175-1.511, P-value < 0.001]. Chronic migraine was significantly more prevalent in LICs/LMICs (44.3% vs. 20.8%; OR = 0.331, 95% CI: 0.236-0.463, P-value < 0.001), as was medication-overuse headache (38.5% vs. 15.0%; OR = 0.282, 95% CI: 0.195-0.406, P-value < 0.001). Access to medications was more restricted in LICs/LMICs, with 79.4% relying on out-of-pocket payments versus 42.1% in HICs/UMICs (OR = 0.210, 95% CI: 0.138-0.319, P-value < 0.001). Medication adherence was lower in LICs/LMICs (52.0% vs. 78.9%; OR = 3.458, 95% CI: 2.471-4.838, P-value < 0.001). Patient dissatisfaction with healthcare services was markedly higher in LICs/LMICs (35.5% vs. 7.9%, P-value < 0.001). Patients in LICs/LMICs reported greater reliance on traditional healers, religious leaders, and CAM modalities such as cupping, herbal remedies, and spiritual healing.
conclusionThis study highlights substantial disparities in migraine diagnosis and management between patients from LICs/LMICs and HICs/UMICs across the MENA region. Financial constraints and cultural influences may shape treatment adherence and CAM use in LICs/LMICs.
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.