A Flexible Format Interdisciplinary Treatment and Rehabilitation Program for Chronic Daily Headache: Patient Clinical Features, Resource Utilization and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the demographics, diagnoses, program duration, human resource utilization and outcomes of patients with chronic daily headache treated in an ambulatory, interdisciplinary, flexible format, treatment and rehabilitation program. BACKGROUND: Research indicates that multidisciplinary care is an effective approach to manage chronic daily headache, but little is known about the resources needed for effective care. METHODS: The study was a secondary data analysis within a cohort design of previously collected data. Patients completed questionnaires and outcome measures on admission and discharge. Diagnoses were extracted from patient charts by professional health records personnel. A central scheduling database provided patient-specific clinician care hours by discipline and type (direct, indirect, group) as well as overall program duration. RESULTS: One hundred and eighteen patients were studied (mean age 41.1 ± 10.4 [x ± SD], 80% female). Sixty-two patients (52.5%) completed the program ("completers"). Migraine was the most common diagnosis. Thirty-six percent of patients had medication overuse. Average pain, mood, disability, and quality of life were significantly improved in completers (P < .001). They utilized 76 ± 45.1 (x ± SD ) total hours of care delivered over a mean of 129.7 ± 66.1 weeks. CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that ambulatory, interdisciplinary, flexible format, treatment and rehabilitation programs are effective in the treatment of chronic daily headache, and we provide data on the resources used by our program in the treatment and rehabilitation of these patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".