MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410551158 · doi:10.1111/head.14953

Perceptions of health, cognition, and pain among middle‐aged and older adults with migraine: A population‐based cross‐sectional study examining findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

2025· article· en· W4410551158 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Makenna K. N. Jensen, Megan E. O’Connell, Marla Mickleborough

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMigraineCohortAnxietyPopulationCohort studyCross-sectional studyDepression (economics)MedicineMoodLongitudinal studyPsychiatryPsychologyGerontologyClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The study compared middle-aged and older Canadians with and without migraine, examining how self-perceptions of health, cognition, and pain relate to objective health metrics. BACKGROUND: Migraine, a debilitating neurological disorder, affects 8.3% of Canadians and 14.0% of the global population. Research has primarily focused on those aged 18-50 years, leaving middle-aged and older adults understudied. Individuals' perceptions of their health, cognition, and pain can tangibly impact their well-being, with negative health self-perceptions linked to higher hospitalization, illness, and mortality rates. METHODS: This population-based cross-sectional study used 2015-2018 data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging during the first follow-up, including the Comprehensive cohort (n = 27,765; 14.0% migraine) and Tracking cohort (n = 17,052; 13.3% migraine). Participants in the Comprehensive cohort were interviewed at one of 11 in-person sites across seven provinces, located 25-50 km from their homes. Those in the Tracking cohort completed a 60-min telephone interview. RESULTS: Females were more than twice as likely to report having a migraine diagnosis. Individuals with migraine rated their physical, mental, and oral health lower than those without migraine and had higher rates of anxiety, depression, and mood disorders. Those with migraine perceived their memory as declining and worried about that decline, yet results displayed only trivial differences in objective memory performance between those with a migraine diagnosis and those without. However, more than twice as many individuals with migraine reported that a physician had told them that they have memory problems. Individuals with migraine reported a higher frequency and intensity of pain and discomfort, resulting in a higher occurrence of missed activities, and higher functional impairment scores. CONCLUSION: By exploring how individuals with migraine perceive their health, cognition, and pain, this study highlights the gap between self-reported health perceptions and objective health assessments. For example, individuals with migraine tend to report poorer mental health, a trend that aligns with the higher prevalence of anxiety, depression, and mood disorders observed within this population. Interestingly, despite individuals with migraine rating their memory as lower than those without migraine, objective memory testing reveals either no difference or even slightly improved scores among those with migraine. Finally, our findings support a Canadian lifetime prevalence rate in this older adult cohort of 13.7%, which aligns with the global prevalence rates of 14.0%.

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)0.002
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face PainSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207