MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308366784 · doi:10.1055/s-0042-1757929

Migraine and Posttraumatic Headache: Similarities and Differences in Brain Network Connectivity

2022· review· en· W4308366784 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine D. Chong, Jennifer Nikolova, Gina Dumkrieger

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Neurology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigraineMedicineTraumatic brain injuryConcussionNeuroscienceDiseaseDysfunctional familyPathophysiologyFamilial hemiplegic migraineFunctional connectivityPhenotypeInternal medicinePsychologyMigraine with auraPoison controlPsychiatryInjury preventionGeneAura

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posttraumatic headache (PTH) is the most common symptom following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) (also known as concussion). Migraine and PTH have similar phenotypes, and a migraine-like phenotype is common in PTH. The similarities between both headache types are intriguing and challenge a better understanding of the pathophysiological commonalities involved in migraine and PTH due to mTBI. Here, we review the PTH resting-state functional connectivity literature and compare it to migraine to assess overlap and differences in brain network function between both headache types. Migraine and PTH due to mTBI have overlapping and disease-specific widespread alterations of static and dynamic functional networks involved in pain processing as well as dysfunctional network connections between frontal regions and areas of pain modulation and pain inhibition. Although the PTH functional network literature is still limited, there is some evidence that dysregulation of the top-down pain control system underlies both migraine and PTH. However, disease-specific differences in the functional circuitry are observed as well, which may reflect unique differences in brain architecture and pathophysiology underlying both headache disorders.

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)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in NeurologySame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207