Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of Migraine in Sivas, Turkey

AbstractPrimary headaches are common disease of the modern society and it has high negative impact on the productivity and the life quality of the affected person. Unfortunately, the precise diagnosis of the headache type is hard and usually imprecise, thus methods of headache diagnosis are still the focus of intense research. The paper introduces the problem of the primary headache diagnosis and presents its current taxonomy. The considered problem is simplified into the three class classification task which is solved using advanced machine learning techniques. Experiments, carried out on the large dataset collected by authors, confirmed that computer decision support systems can achieve high recognition accuracy and therefore be a useful tool in an everyday physician practice. This is the starting point for the future research on automation of the primary headache diagnosis.

show abstract

“…Half of the general population experience a headache during any given year, and more than 90% report a lifetime history of head pain [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic diagnosis of primary headaches by machine learning methods

Krawczyk

Simić

et al. 2013

Open Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prevalence rates for Western countries are fairly consistent, varying from 4.0% to 9.5% in men, and from 11.2% to 25.0% in women [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Non-Western countries report lower figures [13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…These appear to occur once or more than once per month in very few cases in the Danish study [2], in most cases in various USA studies [10,11,31], and in all or almost all cases in studies conducted in France [22], Hungary [17] and Turkey [19]. What appears most striking is that there are marked differences also in studies -such as the Danish study [2] compared with the USA studies [10,11,31] -that report very comparable migraine prevalence rates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Only four [2,[17][18][19] of the post-IHS studies reported in the literature complied strictly with the IHS diagnostic criteria, while the others [6][7][8]11] introduced substantial changes to those criteria with the aim -clearly stated by the authors themselves -of increasing their validity. It is interesting to note, in this regard, what Sakai and Igarashi [16] stated in their report: "Diagnosis of aura based on the IHS criteria was difficult in our questionnaire study because a significant number of answers to the question about aura symptoms were not sufficiently clear to determine whether they were truly indicative of 'focal cerebral dysfunction' as defined by the IHS criteria".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We hope that, in the future, the efforts of investigators in this field will increasingly be concentrated on identifying methodological procedures with a high degree of reliability. [22] 1992 France 83 Stewart, Lipton [31] 1994 USA 60 Launer et al [7] 1999 Netherlands 40 Bank, Marton [17] 2000 Hungary 100 Lipton et al [10] 2001 USA 62 Dahlöf, Linde [9] 2001 Sweden 60 Zivadinov et al [18] 2001 Croatia 77 Kececi, Dener [19] 2002 Turkey 90 Lipton et al [11] 2002 USA 63…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Epidemiology of migraine

Manzoni¹,

Torelli²

2003

J Headache Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decade, there have been many studies on epidemiology of migraine. These studies have dealt not only with those aspects that are strictly related to the spread of the disease, such as prevalence and incidence rates, but also with other interesting aspects, such as familial occurrence, comorbidity and disability.In this paper, we deal with migraine incidence and above all with migraine prevalence, but we try to go beyond sheer data and percentage figures in order to provide an in-depth analysis that may help to assess their reliability. Indeed, the availability of reliable data about prevalence is important, not only per se, but also as a starting point to be taken as reference for studies on the risk running in families and on the risk of developing other diseases, as well as studies on the social and economic impact of migraine.Migraine prevalence studies pose a number of methodological problems: some are typical of all prevalence studies in general, while others are specific to migraine; some of these problems have finally been overcome, while others are still difficult to solve. The main obstacle is case definition. Gian Camillo Manzoni Paola TorelliAbstract One-year migraine prevalence rates in the general population for Western countries vary from 4% to 9% in men and from 11% to 25% in women. Non-Western countries report lower figures. Incidence rates for people under 30 years of age vary from 1.5 to 6 per 1000 personyears in men and from 3 to 24 per 1000 person-years in women. Data on the prevalence of migraine in general, on the gender ratio and on the variations in prevalence in the different age ranges are fairly comparable and can be regarded as very close to reality. On the contrary, data on the incidence of migraine, on the prevalence of different migraine subtypes, such as migraine with aura and the so-called migrainous disorder, and on the frequency of migraine attacks show a striking discordance that somewhat undermines their reliability. The main critical points in prevalence and incidence studies are migraine definition and the methodological approaches used for case screening. Even if International Headache Society (IHS) classification is certainly an improvement over previous tools used in epidemiological studies, the diagnostic criteria for migraine without aura are quite scanty and not easily remembered by subjects belonging to the general population, and those for migraine with aura appear not only difficult to translate for use in a questionnaire or an interview, but also too loose. In particular, the lack of any low-end limit for aura duration may cause an overestimation of migraine with aura prevalence.

show abstract