ArticleCephalalgia reports
Migraine-associated symptoms change with improvement in youth with migraine: A cohort study.
Article in Cephalalgia reports. 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.
- Cluster Analysis of Migraine-Associated Symptoms (CAMS) across the lifespan: a cross-sectional study.BMC neurology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aim: To determine how migraine-associated symptoms change over time, and if they are predictive of outcome at first follow-up visit. Symptoms associated with headache-photophobia and phonophobia, nausea, and/or vomiting-are required criteria for the diagnosis of migraine. Individuals with migraine also report high rates of other symptoms (e.g. lightheadedness, difficulty thinking). We have developed cluster analysis of migraine-associated symptoms (CAMS), which is a composite representation of an expanded set of migraine-associated symptoms that is associated with headache burden. It is unknown if CAMS can change with treatment response or predict outcomes. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of prospectively collected clinician-guided patient questionnaire data from youth (6-17 years) with migraine who were seen at a specialized pediatric headache clinic. Data were collected at time of presentation and at the first follow-up within 30 to 90 days from the first visit. CAMS were implemented to assess associations between 11 migraine-associated symptoms. We determined if CAMS changed over time and as a function of treatment outcome, and if CAMS could be used to predict outcome at first follow-up. Results: Youth with migraine ( Conclusion: Migraine-associated symptoms as captured by CAMS changed over time based on whether youth noted improvement or not but was not predictive of who improved at follow-up.
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.