MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769741964 · doi:10.1111/head.13229

Risk of Stroke Associated With Use of Estrogen Containing Contraceptives in Women With Migraine: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2769741964 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Huma U. Sheikh, Jelena Pavlović, Elizabeth Loder, Rebecca Burch

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Headache Society
KeywordsMedicineMigraineOdds ratioMigraine with auraStroke (engine)AuraPopulationCochrane LibraryInternal medicineEstrogenConfidence intervalEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Migraine with aura has been associated with increased risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. Prior studies have shown a further increase in risk in women using combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs). This has led to guidelines recommending against use of CHCs in this population. We sought to assess whether the risk of stroke is associated with the dose of estrogen and whether there is evidence of synergism between migraine and CHCs. We also sought to assess whether an interaction effect exists between migraine and CHCs. METHODS: We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from inception through January 2016 for relevant English-language studies of adults, of any design. We included studies that examined exposure to CHCs and reported outcomes of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. Data extraction and assessment of study quality were conducted independently by reviewer pairs and quality was assessed with the GRADE and Newcastle Ottawa scales. RESULTS: Of 2480 records, 15 studies met inclusion criteria and six provided odds ratios for the relevant population. The point estimates for the odds ratios for ischemic stroke in women with migraine who used CHCs with any dose of estrogen ranged from 2.08 to 16.9. Studies were generally small and confidence intervals were wide. No studies reported odds ratios for stroke risk as a function of estrogen dose in women with migraine, largely due to insufficient sample sizes. No interaction effect between migraine and CHCs was seen in the seven studies that assessed this. One study differentiated risk by presence or absence of migraine aura and found an increased risk in the migraine with aura population (OR 6.1; CI 3.1 to 12.1 in migraine with aura vs 1.8; CI 1.1 to 2.9 in the migraine without aura group). Studies generally had high Newcastle Ottawa scores and low GRADE levels of evidence. No studies met all three supplementary quality criteria (assessed migraine subtype, used International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for diagnosis of migraine, and stratified risk by estrogen dose). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review shows a lack of good quality studies assessing risk of stroke associated with low dose estrogen use in women with migraine. Further study in this area is needed. The available evidence is consistent with an additive increase in stroke risk with CHC use in women with migraine with aura. Since the absolute risk of stroke is low even in the presence of these risk factors, use of CHCs in women who have migraine with aura should be based on an individualized assessment of harms and benefits.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations88
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face PainSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207