ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
The unmet needs in management, the treatment gap and the burden of migraine in Greece: a Delphi consensus and focus group study from patients' perspective.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Migraine is a chronic, debilitating neurological disease affecting more than 1 billion patients, worldwide. Even though migraines are not life-threatening, they have profound effects on individuals, families, and society. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe patients' perspectives on socioeconomic and humanistic burden of migraine, as well as the unmet medical needs in the clinical management of migraine, in Greece. Methods: A mixed study design of a Delphi panel and a focus group was conducted, in which 16 and 9 episodic migraine patients from the two Greek migraine patient associations participated, respectively. A structured questionnaire of 45 statements regarding burden of disease diagnosis, treatment and unmet needs was used to collect data at Delphi consensus panel. An open and balanced discussion with all participants took place, under the co-ordination of one moderator during the focus group. At each round of the Delphi panel, the percentage of participants who responded "Agree/Strongly Agree," "Disagree/Strongly disagree" and "Neither Agree nor Disagree" was calculated. The consensus threshold was set at 70% of responses. A thematic analysis was performed for the focus group. Results: Consensus was achieved on 34 out of 45 statements. Thematic analysis revealed that patients face severe problems at work due to a lack of understanding and awareness of migraine burden from colleagues and employees, they are forced to modify their daily activities to avoid migraine attacks, and they experience prolonged diagnostic and treatment journey since they visit different medical specialties until they find the one who will be able to effectively help them manage their migraine. Additionally, they expressed concerns regarding the management of their disease due to patient-physician communication gap, dissatisfaction with traditional oral preventive therapies and lack of therapeutic options for older ages and in case of existence of specific comorbidities. Conclusion: Participants agreed that Migraine has a multifaceted impact on several aspects of patients' lives. Patient-centered care, better training for healthcare providers, targeted therapies, and improved communication tools emerged as key factors in addressing the unmet medical needs of migraine sufferers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.