Understanding the gaps in headache and migraine treatment with psychological and behavioral interventions: A narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In this narrative review, we summarize relevant literature pertaining to psychosocial risk factors for headache and migraine progression, current behavioral and psychological treatments, and consider promising treatments. BACKGROUND: Headache and migraine are common and associated with significant burden and disability. Current treatments targeting psychosocial risk factors show modest outcomes and do not directly address the impact of early life adversity, including the development of maladaptive emotional processing. An intervention that could address these factors and include components of current evidence-based interventions may lead to improved outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for articles through December 2022. Search terms included headache, migraine, psychological interventions, behavioral interventions, cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness, psychiatric comorbidities, adverse childhood experiences, trauma, and emotional processing. RESULTS: Trauma and childhood adversity show a correlation with headache and migraine progression. Developmental adversity and trauma interfere with adaptive emotional processing, which may worsen headache and migraine symptoms, while adaptive ways of experiencing emotions are shown to improve symptoms. Current behavioral and psychological interventions, such as cognitive-behavioral and mindfulness therapies, are effective treatments for headache, but they produce small to medium effect sizes and do not directly address the impact of trauma and emotional conflicts-common factors that contribute to chronicity and disability, especially among certain subpopulations of headache patients such as those with migraine. Thus, there exists a gap in current treatment. CONCLUSION: There is a gap in headache and migraine treatment for those patients who have a history of trauma, childhood adversity, and maladaptive emotional processing. We suggest that an integrated psychological treatment that includes components of current evidence-based interventions and addresses gaps by focusing on processing trauma-related emotions may improve chronic and debilitating 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".