MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416969637 · doi:10.2196/59951

Self-Reported Triggers Evaluation of High-Risk Dietary and Environmental Factors Preceding Migraine Onset by Using a Mobile Tracking App (Migraine Insight): Comparative Analysis Study

2025· article· en· W4416969637 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christina Wornom, Brooklyn Brekke-Kumley, Tavsimran Luthra, Lynn J Smith, Jane Harrington

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigraineMobile appsTracking (education)Migraine DisordersmHealth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Migraines are a significant health concern affecting millions of individuals, often requiring habitual tracking of potential triggers to mitigate or predict episodes. Digital health tools such as mobile apps offer a scalable solution for personalized tracking and pattern recognition. Migraine Insight is one such app that facilitates daily logging to quantitatively assess individualized patterns of events preceding migraine onset. However, while various triggers have been reported in migraine literature, there is limited large-scale electronic user-driven data on the frequency and relative impact of specific triggers. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to address this gap by analyzing user-reported data from Migraine Insight to identify the most frequently reported triggers and evaluate their potential associations with migraine onset. METHODS: Food-associated migraine triggers were identified by performing a noninterventional, retrospective analysis of self-reported data obtained via the Migraine Insight app. A collaboration was made with the representatives of the Migraine Insight app to extrapolate the data needed for the study. A preliminary keyword list was assessed from a raw data set of 2605 data entry values, extracted from a 30-day period of September 19 to October 18, 2021, to identify high ranking self-reported events, classified by dietary habits, environmental conditions, body physiology, and medications. The variables examined included the following: dietary items, environmental conditions, body physiology, and electronics. Food items were combined into similar groups, considering variable spelling and descriptions of self-reported events. The association of migraine onset after consumption of top 5 dietary products was evaluated to establish the frequency of migraine episodes for all users who reported the items. RESULTS: Collectively, food (n=353) and beverage (n=252) totaled the highest reported entries, with chocolate, wine, tea, coffee, and cheese as the highest ranked foods for prevalence of reporting across all users and for frequency of migraine onset for users who consumed the items within 48 hours. The 4 highest nonfood entries were altered sleep patterns (n=245), stress or anxiety (n=199), rain or storm conditions (n=192), and bright light or brightness (n=191). Statistical analysis showed that chocolate was the only food trigger significantly associated with migraines (P=.003 vs 50%; P=.04 vs average). Consumption of tea approached significance (P=.051), while consumption of coffee, cheese, and wine were not significant. These findings suggest that chocolate is the most consistent dietary trigger. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk foods, environmental conditions, stress, and lighting with highest prevalence reporting have previously been reported in medical literature, implicating that a migraine tracking app is a valid alternative to paper-based diaries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicMigraine and Headache Studies→French-language works237,207→