Evidence Hub

A population-health approach to characterizing migraine by comorbidity: Results from the Mindfulness and Migraine Cohort Study

S. Sudat, Alice S. Jacobson, A. Avins, R. Lipton, A. Pressman

Cephalalgia, 2022

95,563 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background The heterogeneity of migraine has been reported extensively, with identified subgroups usually based on symptoms. Grouping individuals with migraine and similar comorbidity profiles has been suggested, however such segmentation methods have not been tested using real-world clinical data. Objective To gain insights into natural groupings of patients with migraine using latent class analysis based on electronic health record-determined comorbidities. Methods Retrospective electronic health record data analysis of primary-care patients at Sutter Health, a large open healthcare system in Northern California, USA. We identified migraine patients over a five-year time period (2015–2019) and extracted 29 comorbidities. We then applied latent class analysis to identify comorbidity-based natural subgroups. Results We identified 95,563 patients with migraine and found seven latent classes, summarized by their predominant comorbidities and population share: fewest comorbidities (61.8%), psychiatric (18.3%), some comorbidities (10.0%), most comorbidities – no cardiovascular (3.6%), vascular (3.1%), autoimmune/joint/pain (2.2%), and most comorbidities (1.0%). We found minimal demographic differences across classes. Conclusion Our study found groupings of migraine patients based on comorbidity that have the potential to be used to guide targeted treatment strategies and the development of new therapies.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 95,563 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free