ReviewCureus2026
Botulinum Toxin Type A for Cervicogenic Headache: A Review of the Current Evidence.
Review in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervicogenic headache (CH) is a secondary headache disorder arising from cervical structures and is frequently associated with pain, disability, and reduced quality of life. Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) has been proposed as a therapeutic option due to its muscle-relaxing and antinociceptive properties; however, its efficacy in CH remains uncertain. This review aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding the use of BoNT-A in the treatment of cervicogenic headache. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases, and studies assessing BoNT-A in adults with CH were included. Data on study characteristics, injection protocols, clinical outcomes, and adverse events were extracted and qualitatively synthesized. Five studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising four randomized controlled trials and one prospective study. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in diagnostic criteria, toxin formulations, injection techniques, targeted muscles, and outcome measures. Most studies reported reductions in headache intensity and frequency following BoNT-A treatment, particularly in trigger point-guided protocols and chronic or treatment-resistant populations. The trapezius and splenius capitis were the most frequently targeted muscles. Nevertheless, one high-quality placebo-controlled trial found no significant benefit over placebo. Overall, BoNT-A was well tolerated, with no serious adverse events reported. Although several studies suggest potential benefits of BoNT-A for cervicogenic headache, the current evidence remains inconclusive. Further well-designed studies using standardized diagnostic criteria and injection protocols are needed to better define its therapeutic role.
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.