Does medication overuse headache represent a behavior of dependence?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medication overuse is relatively common in patients with frequent headache. To explore the prevalence of patients who meet the criteria for substance dependence in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Edition IV (DSM-IV), and to identify variables of substance dependence among patients with chronic daily headache, we recruited consecutive patients with chronic daily headache at a headache clinic from November 1999 to June 2004. Each patient completed a headache intake form, a dependence questionnaire modified from DSM-IV, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The presence of probable medication overuse headache (pMOH) was defined on the basis of the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition, 2004. A total of 1,861 patients with chronic daily headache (1,369 women, 492 men; mean age, 49.6+/-15.4 years) were recruited. Almost half (895/1,861, 48%) met criteria of pMOH, and 606 of these patients (606/895, 68%) met three of five DSM-IV substance dependence criteria. In contrast, only 191 of 968 patients without pMOH (20%) met the DSM-IV criteria (OR=8.6, [7.0-10.6], chi-square test, P<0.001). Patients who fulfilled DSM-IV criteria of dependence had higher numbers of physician appointments in the past year. Multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that migraine headache, frequent physician consultation, intensity of headache, and presence of a higher anxiety score were significant independent variables for substance dependence. Among patients with chronic daily headache, pMOH was associated with behaviors of substance dependence.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".