P.036 Burden of illness in patients with migraine in Canada: A patient survey and retrospective chart review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are limited Canadian data on the impact of migraine on quality of life, economic, and societal burden. Therefore, the aim of this study was to characterize the humanistic and economic burden of illness of migraine in Canada. Methods:Retrospective medical chart review and prospective patient survey were used to evaluate the clinical, social, and economic burden of migraine in patients who failed at least two prior prophylactic therapies.Results: 287 migraine patients were included. High- frequency episodic migraine (8 to 14 MMDs) and chronic migraine (15+ MMDs) made up the majority of the cohort (35.2% and 35.9%, respectively). 72.8% of the patients had underlying comorbidities 78% indicated that they experienced severe disability on their daily life due to their headaches. The total estimated annual cost of chronic migraine was $25,669 per patient while high-frequency episodic and low-frequency episodic migraine was associated with an annual cost of $24,885 and $15,651 per patient respectively. Conclusions: This study provides a recent and comprehensive assessment of the burden of illness associated with migraine in Canada and showed that migraine is associated with a substantial humanistic and economic burden for patients and healthcare systems.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".