MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086948619 · doi:10.1111/head.13943

Patterns of Perceived Stress Throughout the Migraine Cycle: A Longitudinal Cohort Study Using Daily Prospective Diary Data

2020· article· en· W3086948619 on OpenAlexaff
Marina Vives‐Mestres, Amparo Casanova, Dawn C. Buse, Stephen Donoghue, Timothy T. Houle, Richard B. Lipton, Alec Mian, Kenneth Shulman, Serena L. Orr

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigraineMedicinePerceived Stress ScaleCohortProspective cohort studyPhysical therapyPediatricsAnesthesiaInternal medicineStress (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives To describe patterns of perceived stress across stages of the migraine cycle, within and between individuals and migraine episodes as defined for this study. Methods Individuals with migraine aged ≥18 years, who were registered to use the digital health platform N1‐Headache TM , and completed 90 days of daily data entry regarding migraine, headache symptoms, and lifestyle factors were eligible for inclusion. Perceived stress was rated once a day at the participant’s chosen time with a single question, “How stressed have you felt today?” with response options graded on a 0‐10 scale. Days were categorized into phases of the migraine cycle: P pre = pre‐migraine headache (the 2 days prior to the first day with migraine headache), P 0 = migraine headache days, P post = post‐migraine headache (the 2 days following the last migraine day with migraine headache), and P i = interictal days (all other days). Episodes, defined as discrete occurrences of migraine with days in all 4 phases, were eligible if there was at least 1 reported daily perceived stress value in each phase. Individuals with ≥5 valid episodes, and ≥75% compliance (tracking 90 days in 120 calendar days or less) were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Results Data from 351 participants and 2115 episodes were included in this analysis. Eighty‐six percent of the sample (302/351) were female. The mean number of migraine days per month was 6.1 (range 2‐13, standard deviation = 2.3) and the mean number of episodes was 6.0 (range 5‐10, standard deviation = 1.0) over the 90‐day period. Only 8 (8/351, 2.3%) participants had chronic migraine (defined as 15 or more headache days per month with at least 8 days meeting criteria for migraine). Cluster analysis revealed 3 common patterns of perceived stress variation across the migraine cycle. For cluster 1, the “let down” pattern, perceived stress in the interictal phase ( P i ) falls in the pre‐headache phase ( P pre ) and then decreases more in the migraine phase ( P 0 ) relative to P i . For cluster 2, the “flat” pattern, perceived stress is relatively unchanging throughout the migraine cycle. For cluster 3, the “stress as a trigger/symptom” pattern, perceived stress in P pre increases relative to P i , and increases further in P 0 relative to P i . Episodes were distributed across clusters as follows: cluster 1: 354/2115, 16.7%; cluster 2: 1253/2115, 59.2%, and cluster 3: 508/2115, 24.0%. Twelve participants (12/351, 3.4%) had more than 50% of their episodes fall into cluster 1, 216 participants (216/351, 61.5%) had more than 50% of their episodes fall into cluster 2, and 25 participants (25/351, 7.1%) had more than 50% of their episodes fall into cluster 3. There were 40 participants with ≥90% of their episodes in cluster 2, with no participants having ≥90% of their episodes in cluster 1 or 3. Conclusions On an aggregate level, perceived stress peaks during the pain phase of the migraine cycle. However, on an individual and episode basis, there are 3 dominant patterns of perceived stress variation across the migraine cycle. Elucidating how patterns of perceived stress vary across the migraine cycle may contribute insights into disease biology, triggers and protective factors, and provide a framework for targeting individualized treatment plans.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.356
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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