The Magnitude of Physical and Sensory Impairments in Post-traumatic and Non-traumatic Cervicogenic Headaches: A Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Cervicogenic headaches can significantly deteriorate the quality of life of patients and decrease their productivity. Few studies have been conducted to assess the magnitude of physical impairments among patients with non-traumatic and post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches. Therefore, this study was conducted to examine and compare the magnitude of cervical physical impairments among patients with post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches in contrast to patients with non-traumatic cervicogenic headaches, migraine, and a group of sex- and age-matched controls who did not have headaches. Methodology This was a comparative study. A total of 104 patients and 30 sex- and age-matched controls were included. The patients were stratified into three groups: post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches (n = 42), non-traumatic cervicogenic headaches (n = 30), and migraines (n = 32). The cervical active range of motion and proprioception were assessed using a goniometer, the craniovertebral angle was measured while the heads of the subjects rested in a comfortable position, the strength of the cervical flexors and extensors was assessed using a hand-held dynamometer, and endurance of the short cervical flexors was assessed while the subjects were in a supine position with no pillow. Skin roll tests were performed in the trapezius and mandibular areas, and pain was measured using the McGill Pain Questionnaire-Short Form. Results Patients in the post-traumatic cervicogenic headache group reported a significantly higher number of headache days (p < 0.001) compared to the controls, patients with migraines, and those with non-traumatic cervicogenic headaches. Patients with post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches showed a significant reduction in total rotation, flexion and extension, lateral bending, and craniovertebral angle compared to the controls, patients with migraines, and those with non-traumatic cervicogenic headaches. On the other hand, the controls endured significantly longer and had stronger neck flexors and extensors compared to the patients in the migraine, non-traumatic, and post-traumatic cervicogenic headache groups, respectively. Patients with post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches significantly reported higher affective and total pain compared to the controls and patients in the migraine group. Conclusions Patients with post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches had significant deficits in the cervical active range of motion in the different planes, endurance, and strength of cervical flexors and extensors compared to the controls and patients with migraine and non-traumatic cervicogenic headaches. Similarly, patients with post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches reported higher affective pain compared to the controls and patients with migraines. The results of this study indicated that patients with post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches have significantly higher physical impairments compared to patients with non-traumatic cervicogenic headaches. These differences warrant caution when combining data from patients with non-traumatic and post-traumatic cervicogenic headaches.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".