Home-Based Behavioral Treatments for chronic Benign Headache: A Meta-Analysis of Controlled Trials
Abstract
Controlled clinical trials have consistently demonstrated that behavioral treatments for chronic benign headache produce clinically beneficial outcomes both post-treatment and at follow-up. Given these results there is interest in cost-reduction and redesign of these treatments to improve their accessibility. One promising approach in this regard is home-based headache treatment. These treatments seek to provide the same amount of treatment as clinic-based treatments; however, some of the material typically presented to the patient by a clinician is presented through home-study materials (e.g., manuals, audiotapes). To date, the published literature contains 20 controlled clinical trials which have examined the outcomes produced by home-based treatments. This article presents the first comprehensive meta-analysis of these clinical outcome studies. Results of the quantitative analyses suggest that home-based treatments produce comparable, or with certain outcome measures, superior results to clinic-based treatments. Moreover, cost-effectiveness scores of home-based treatments were found to be more than five times larger than those of clinic-based therapies. Methodological analyses are also presented along with suggestions for future research.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The evidence is perhaps strongest for the treatment of headache, with home-based, self-help interventions resulting in comparable or superior outcomes to clinic-based treatments.
“The evidence is perhaps strongest for the treatment of headache, with home-based, self-help interventions resulting in comparable or superior outcomes to clinic-based treatments.31”
From An Online Self-help CBT Intervention for Chronic Lower Back Pain (2012) · cites this paper as [31]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 24 · Cited by 137
- Authors
- Haddock, C. K., Rowan, A., Andrasik, F., Wilson, P., Talcott, G. W., & Stein, R.
- Affiliations
- Wilford Hall Ambulatory Surgical Center (US)
- Wilford Hall Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA;
- Venue
- Cephalalgia
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1997-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 113-118
- ISSN
- 0333-1024 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2982
- OpenAlex
- W2002528895
- Cited by
- 137
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cephalalgia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01ns029855-04)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS-29855)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Migraine and Headache Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Complementary and Manual Therapy › Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
- Keywords
- home-based therapy, behavior therapy, cost-effectiveness, treatment accessibility, headache treatment
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Behavior Therapy, Child, Chronic Disease, Female, Headache, Home Care Services, Humans, Male, Middle Aged
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
