Blood serum levels of PACAP and migraine onset: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the relationship between blood pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) levels and migraine. BACKGROUND: PACAP is involved in the onset of migraine, but the results from clinical studies on PACAP level variations across different periods of migraine are conflicting. METHODS: We systematically searched for observational studies that reported PACAP levels in people with migraine and non-migraine controls published in English from the PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid electronic databases, or in Chinese from the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and the WanFang Med database. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to assess the quality of the included studies. The quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. RESULTS: = -0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.49 to -0.22) and that the PACAP is higher in people with migraine during the ictal period than in the interictal period (standardized mean difference = 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.66) for both adults and children with migraine. Adult patients with episodic migraine (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -9.58 pg/mL, 95% CI -13.41 to -5.75 pg/mL) or chronic migraine (WMD = -10.93 pg/mL, 95% CI -15.57 to -6.29 pg/mL) had lower blood PACAP levels than non-migraine controls during the interictal period, supported by a "low" or "very low" quality of evidence, respectively, according to the GRADE rules. CONCLUSION: There is a very low certainty of evidence suggesting that the PACAP level is negatively correlated with migraine disease duration of adults with migraine and it varies greatly among different periods of migraine of both adults and children with migraine.
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 | 0.013 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".