Entry Demographics and Pharmacological Treatment of Migraine Patients Referred to a Tertiary Care Pain Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to examine pharmacological treatment of migraine patients admitted to a tertiary care pain clinic. A retrospective review of 100 consecutive migraine patients admitted to The Wasser Pain Management Centre was conducted. Patients included met the 2nd Edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for diagnosis of migraine. Data were collected with regard to nicotine and alcohol consumption, family history of migraine headaches, other pain diagnoses and pharmacological treatment. Twenty-two per cent of these patients were male as opposed to 78% female. The mean age of patients admitted for migraine was 43.4 years. Of the patients admitted, 48% had tried at least one triptan in the past and only 31% were actively using triptan(s). The most commonly used triptan in the past had been sumatriptan, whereas the most common triptan used on admission was rizatriptan. Opiate use was much more prevalent; 72% of admitted patients were using an opiate and 27% used multiple opiates. A significant number of patients had not yet been tried on a triptan despite meeting the diagnostic criteria for migraine and having significant disability. More education of the general medical community may be beneficial in implementing a stratified care approach to migraine management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".