ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2025
Chronic headache disorders as a threat to brain health among employees of a city office in the Tokyo metropolitan area.
Article in The journal of headache and pain, 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.
- Cumulative adverse childhood experiences increase migraine risk in later life in China: evidence from CHARLS with mediation and Mendelian randomization.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic headache disorders, especially migraine, are known to cause considerable loss of productivity and negatively affect brain health in the workplace. The present study aims to clarify how common chronic headache disorders are and how much productivity loss they are causing within administrative bodies.
methodsAn intranet-based headache survey was conducted with employees of a city office located in the Tokyo metropolitan area. Headache classification among participants was made according to the ICHD-3 criteria. Headache days, headache intensity, headache-related disability, and productivity loss were analyzed in each headache group. We also explored what factors were linked to the likelihood of seeking medical care for headache.
resultsThe response rate was 52.3%, with 1156 men and 764 women. Among individuals who had chronic headache during the 12 months preceding the survey, 116, 95, 93, and 214 had migraine without aura (MO), probable MO (pMO), migraine with aura (MA), and tension-type headache (TTH) as their most severe and distressing headache, respectively (6.0%, 4.9%, 4.8%, and 11.1%, respectively). MO, pMO, and MA were found to have more severe impact on daily activities and work productivity than TTH. Migraine-related presenteeism was proportional to headache frequency and intensity. A total of 63.1% of those who had active chronic headache had never sought care for their headaches, and only 10.4% of them were consulting a healthcare professional. The consultation rate was lower among younger headache sufferers. Migraine features, such as vomiting, photophobia, and worsening by physical activity, were associated with seeking medical care. The annual estimated wage loss due to headache was highest in the MO group, totaling 39,202,191.2 JPY (267,463.9 USD) per year, 81.6% of which was derived from presenteeism. It was estimated that active chronic headache disorders were responsible for 8.6% of the total wage.
conclusionsMany individuals with chronic headache disorders are underdiagnosed and undertreated within administrative bodies. Compared with TTH, migraine compromises brain health more severely and generates more economic loss. Our data imply that chronic headache disorders, particularly migraine, may lower the quality of public service.
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.