Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Probable Migraine in the United States: Results Of The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study

Silberstein, S, Loder, E, Diamond, S, Reed, ML, Bigal, ME, Lipton, RB·2007·Cephalalgia

Abstract

Probable migraine (PM) is a prevalent migraine subtype fulfilling all but one criterion for migraine with or without aura. The aims of this study were: (i) to describe the epidemiology, medical recognition and patterns of treatment for PM in the USA; (ii) to compare the patterns of preventive PM treatment in the population with expert panel guidelines for preventive treatment. A validated self-administered headache questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 120 000 US households. Subjects were classified as PM according to the second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2). The questionnaire also assessed patterns of migraine treatment. Guidelines for preventive medication use were developed by a panel of headache experts, who used headache frequency and impairment to assess the need for preventive therapy and the gap between current and ideal use. Our sample consisted of 162 576 individuals aged ≥12 years. The 1-year period prevalence of PM was 4.5% (3.9% in men and 5.1% in women). In women and men, prevalence was higher in middle life, between the ages of 30 and 59 years. The prevalence of PM was significantly higher in African-Americans than in Whites (female 7.4% vs. 4.8%; male 4.8% vs. 3.7%) and inversely related to household income. During their headaches, most (48.2%) had at least some impairment, while 22.1% were severely disabled. The vast majority (97%) of PM sufferers used acute treatments, although 71% usually treated with over-the-counter medication. Most PM sufferers (52.8%) never used a migraine-preventive treatment and only 7.9% were currently using preventive medication. According to the expert panel guidelines, prevention should be offered (16.9%) or considered (11.5%) for 28.4% of the PM sufferers in the survey. We conclude that PM is a frequent, undertreated, sometimes disabling disorder. It has an epidemiological profile similar to migraine. In contrast to migraine, which is less prevalent in African-Americans than in Whites, PM is more prevalent in African-Americans than in Whites. In the USA, many with PM do not receive adequate treatment.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2006.01275.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 159

Metadata

Authors
Silberstein, S., Loder, E., Diamond, S., Reed, M., Bigal, M., & Lipton, R.
Venue
Cephalalgia
Published
2007-03
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
220-229
ISSN
  • 0333-1024 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2982
OpenAlex
W2104107693
Cited by
159
References
1
FWCI
6.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Probable Migraine in the United States: Results Of The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2006.01275.x
The paper
Silberstein, S., Loder, E., Diamond, S., Reed, M., Bigal, M., & Lipton, R. (2007). Probable Migraine in the United States: Results Of The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study. Cephalalgia. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2006.01275.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.