↓ Skip to main content

Differences in central facilitation between episodic and chronic migraineurs in nociceptive-specific trigeminal pathways

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Headache and Pain, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Differences in central facilitation between episodic and chronic migraineurs in nociceptive-specific trigeminal pathways
Published in
The Journal of Headache and Pain, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s10194-016-0637-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jong-Hee Sohn, Chul-Ho Kim, Hui-Chul Choi

Abstract

The trigeminal nociceptive system plays a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of migraines. The present study investigated whether there are differences between patients with episodic migraine (EM) and patients with chronic migraine (CM) in trigeminal pain processing at the brainstem and cortical levels using the nociceptive blink reflex (nBR) and pain-related evoked potentials (PREP). This study assessed 68 female migraineurs (38 EM patients and 30 CM patients) and 40 age-matched controls using simultaneous recordings of nBR and PREP during the interictal period. In terms of the nBR, EM patients displayed significantly decreased latencies and larger amplitudes and area-under-the-curve (AUC) values for the R2 component, whereas CM patients showed significantly prolonged latencies and smaller amplitudes and AUC values for the R2 component (p < 0.05). In terms of PREP, both the EM and CM patients had decreased latencies (N1, P1), with larger amplitude compared with the controls (p < 0.05), which indicates facilitation at the cortical level. Additionally, the amplitude and AUC values of the R2 component exhibited a negative correlation, whereas the latency of the R2 component for the nBR showed a positive correlation, with the frequency of headaches in migraineurs (p < 0.01). In the present study, the facilitation in the trigeminal nociceptive pathway of the EM group suggests the occurrence of migraine-specific hyperexcitability. Additionally, the suppression of R2 at the brainstem level in the CM group may relate to impaired or dysfunctional descending pain modulation. These findings suggest that there are adaptive or maladaptive responses due to the chronification of migraine attacks.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Other 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 41%
Neuroscience 5 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2016.
All research outputs
#21,186,729
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#1,311
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,879
of 271,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#31
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.