MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4212904439 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1330654/v1

What Contributes To Quality Of Life In Patients With Episodic And Chronic Cluster Headache?

2022· preprint· en· W4212904439 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Davide Cappon, Norazah Abu Bakar, Mariam Torkamani, Manjit Matharu, Marjan Jahanshahi

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyQuality of life (healthcare)Beck Hopelessness ScalePsychosocialAnxietyMoodPsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyDepression (economics)Chronic painBeck Anxiety InventoryActivities of daily livingSomatizationMedicineBeck Depression InventoryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Cluster headache (CH) limits daily activities as well as social and family life, worsening quality of life (QoL). There is a paucity of research on what factors, other than pain and disability, influence QoL in Chronic CH (CCH) and Episodic CH (ECH). This study compares the potential contribution of several psychosocial variables to QoL in CCH and ECH and investigates the association of QoL with measures of pain, disability, psychiatric symptoms, psychological health, and functional well-being.Methods: 167 patients with CCH and 239 with ECH were assessed. QoL was measured with the CH-QoL, a reliable and valid disease-specific measure of QoL in CH. Measures of psychological health (self-esteem, perceived stigma, acceptance of illness), functional well-being (in professional, social, and private life), and psychiatric symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, General Health Questionnaire-28, Beck Hopelessness Scale, Starkstein Apathy Scale) as well as pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire, Pain Behaviour Checklist), and disability (HDI, HIT-6, MIDAS) were obtained. Results: Individuals with CCH reported poorer QoL than those with ECH in terms of “restrictions of activities of daily living” and “mood and interpersonal relationships”. Patients with CCH and ECH who had a higher level of disability had significantly worse QoL. Patients with low self-esteem and those who reported less acceptance of their disease and reported higher perceived stigma had significantly worse QoL. Additionally, CCH and ECH patients with psychiatric comorbidities, such as anxiety, depression, hopelessness, and apathy had poorer QoL. QoL was correlated with measures of psychosocial functioning, disability, and psychiatric comorbidity.Conclusions: CH has a greater psychosocial impact on CCH patients than on ECH patients, as evidenced by significantly worse ratings for the former on all disability, mood, psychological health, functional well-being and QoL measures. In addition to managing physical pain, treating the psychiatric, psychological, and social factors associated with cluster headaches may be useful in preventing and lessening the long-term impact of CH on QoL. Our findings highlight additional factors to consider in the clinical management of CH and to incorporate in cognitive behavioral therapy with CH patients to reduce disability and the psychosocial impact of CH on daily life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicMigraine and Headache Studies→French-language works237,207→