MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vinson D. Treatment patterns of isolated benign headache in U.S. emergency departments.

2002· article· en· W1985559543 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martin ten Hove

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProchlorperazineMedicineMigraineDihydroergotamineSumatriptanZolmitriptanAnesthesiaCephalalgiaHyperacusisTriptansAntiemeticMetoclopramideEmergency departmentPediatricsPromethazineMigraine treatmentEmergency medicineNauseaPsychiatryVomitingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vinson D. Treatment patterns of isolated benign headache in U.S. emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med 2002;39:215–36. The author analyzed the treatment of adult patients with isolated headache who sought treatment at United States emergency departments in light of practice guidelines in the United States and Canada. Data were extracted from the 1998 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, which sampled all visits from 398 emergency departments in the United States over a 4-week period. The migraine headache and unspecified headache cohorts included 811,419 and 604,977 patients respectively. On average, patients received 1.8 medications from a pharmacopeia of 36 drugs. The most common drugs used for the migraine cohort were meperidine (35.7%), promethazine (29.4%), IV ketorolac (16.6%), and prochlorperazine (15.6%). Parental medications were given to 85% of migraine patients. These facts need to be interpreted in light of the fact that 35% of the migraine patients reported moderate headache and only 20% reported severe headache. The American Academy of Neurology recommends an antiemetic (particularly prochlorperazine) plus dihydroergotamine as the therapy of choice for aborting an acute migraine episode. The Canadian Headache Society's algorithm for the treatment of severe migraine headache states that the agent of choice is a dopamine-antagonist antiemetic followed by dihydroergotamine or sumatriptan. The treatment of patients in this study diverged from these recommendations in two ways. First, only one fourth of patients with migraine received a non-opioid agent as part of their drug regimen. Second, opioids were more commonly used as first-line drugs than as second-line drugs reserved for patients who do not respond to non-opioid treatment. The author questioned the heavy reliance on meperidine, because its shorter half-life and potential for dependency make the drug “suboptimal” and a “last resort” choice for therapy, according to the Canadian Headache Society. The study is limited by the absence of data detailing prior medications tried by these patients, as well as the efficacy and tolerance of the medications. There are likely to be patient and physician factors that explain why current practice in emergency rooms differs from the recommended therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OphthalmologySame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207