Evidence Hub

Association of Migraine with Increased Risk of Central Serous Chorioretinopathy: A retrospective Cohort Study

I. Nitzan, Shoham Kubovsky, Nadav Shemesh, Tehila Shlomov, O. Shmueli, Natan Lishinsky-Fischer, I. Akavian, Itay Chowers et al.

American journal of ophthalmology-glaucoma, 2025

413,663 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To evaluate whether migraine is associated with an increased risk of developing central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR) using a large real-world electronic medical record dataset.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS AND CONTROLS

Adults aged 18-40 years with a diagnosis of migraine were identified from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network and compared to individuals without migraine or other headache syndromes who underwent routine medical examinations. Patients with a history of CSCR or corticosteroid use within one month before or after the index migraine diagnosis were excluded. All patients had at least one year of follow-up data after the index date.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed in a 1:1 ratio to balance baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Time-to-event analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazards models and log-rank tests. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of the association across sex, migraine subtypes (with and without aura), age range, follow-up duration, corticosteroid exposure, and an alternative multivariable Cox regression in the full cohorts. Additional analyses evaluated the effect of migraine-related medications on CSCR risk.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incident CSCR within five years of the index date. The E-value was calculated to evaluate robustness against unmeasured confounding.

RESULTS

After matching, 413,663 patients with balanced baseline characteristics…

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: 413,663 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