MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110128296 · doi:10.3166/dea-2020-0123

Exercise as a Promising Strategy to Manage Cluster Headache Pain: A Case Report

2020· article· en· W3110128296 on OpenAlexaff
Alexis Marcotte‐Chénard, David Mathieu, Éléonor Riesco, Guillaume Léonard

Bibliographic record

VenueDouleur et Analgésie · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerobic exerciseHeadachesMedicinePhysical therapyCluster headacheCluster (spacecraft)Intervention (counseling)MigraineAnesthesiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background : Various pharmacological treatments have been used to relieve pain and reduce the duration and occurrence of cluster headache (CH) attacks, but these treatments remain partially effective for many patients. Aerobic exercises have been proposed to decrease the prevalence and severity of symptoms associated with other types of headaches, but the effectiveness of aerobic exercise for CH management has not yet been investigated. Case presentation : This report describes the case of a 24 yearold male patient diagnosed with episodic CH (1/day; > 1 h). Thirteen days after the first episode, moderate-intensity continuous aerobic exercise was performed (10–30 min) at the onset of CH attack. Aerobic exercise reduced both severity and duration of CH attacks. Conclusions : This case report suggests that performing moderate-intensity aerobic exercise at the onset of a CH attack may be an interesting non-pharmacologic intervention that can be used to ease pain symptoms.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDouleur et AnalgésieSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207