Cited by 549Migraine and Headache StudiesTemporomandibular Joint DisordersMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Chronic Migraine Prevalence, Disability, and Sociodemographic Factors: Results From the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study

Buse, Dawn C., Manack, Aubrey N., Fanning, Kristina M., Serrano, Daniel, Reed, Michael L., Turkel, Catherine C., Lipton, Richard B.·2012·Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain

Abstract

Objectives.— To estimate the prevalence and distribution of chronic migraine (CM) in the US population and compare the age‐ and sex‐specific profiles of headache‐related disability in persons with CM and episodic migraine. Background.— Global estimates of CM prevalence using various definitions typically range from 1.4% to 2.2%, but the influence of sociodemographic factors has not been completely characterized. Methods.— The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study mailed surveys to a sample of 120,000 US households selected to represent the US population. Data on headache frequency, symptoms, sociodemographics, and headache‐related disability (using the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale) were obtained. Modified Silberstein–Lipton criteria were used to classify CM (meeting International Classification of Headache Disorders, second edition, criteria for migraine with a headache frequency of ≥15 days over the preceding 3 months). Results.— Surveys were returned by 162,756 individuals aged ≥12 years; 19,189 individuals (11.79%) met International Classification of Headache Disorders, second edition, criteria for migraine (17.27% of females; 5.72% of males), and 0.91% met criteria for CM (1.29% of females; 0.48% of males). Relative to 12 to 17 year olds, the age‐ and sex‐specific prevalence for CM peaked in the 40s at 1.89% (prevalence ratio 4.57; 95% confidence interval 3.13‐6.67) for females and 0.79% (prevalence ratio 3.35; 95% confidence interval 1.99‐5.63) for males. In univariate and adjusted models, CM prevalence was inversely related to annual household income. Lower income groups had higher rates of CM. Individuals with CM had greater headache‐related disability than those with episodic migraine and were more likely to be in the highest Migraine Disability Assessment Scale grade (37.96% vs 9.50%, respectively). Headache‐related disability was highest among females with CM compared with males. CM represented 7.68% of migraine cases overall, and the proportion generally increased with age. Conclusions.— In the US population, the prevalence of CM was nearly 1%. In adjusted models, CM prevalence was highest among females, in mid‐life, and in households with the lowest annual income. Severe headache‐related disability was more common among persons with CM and most common among females with CM.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2012.02223.x

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Current understanding of migraine burden among individuals with the highest unmet needs, specifically those experiencing ≥4 monthly migraine days and prior prophylaxis failure, is limited.

    “However, the current understanding of migraine burden among individuals with the highest unmet needs, specifically those experiencing ≥4 monthly migraine days (MMDs) and prior prophylaxis failure, is limited.”
  • No detailed assessment of the current treatment pathway, impact on work productivity, or burden associated with premonitory and postdromal phases of migraine is available in individuals experiencing ≥4 monthly migraine days who have had previous prophylactic treatments that failed and continue to experience frequent migraines.

    “Specifically, no detailed assessment of the current treatment pathway, impact on work productivity, or burden associated with premonitory and postdromal phases of migraine is available in individuals experiencing ≥4 MMDs who have had previous prophylactic treatments that failed and continue to experience frequent migraines.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buse, D. C., Manack, A. N., Fanning, K. M., Serrano, D., Reed, M. L., Turkel, C. C., & Lipton, R. B.
Affiliations
Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Buse, Dawn C.
Venue
Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-07-25
Volume
52
Issue
10
Pages
1456-1470
ISSN
  • 0017-8748 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-4610
OpenAlex
W2091270761
Cited by
549
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 3
FWCI
17.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Headache The Journal of Head and Face Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Migraine and Headache Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Complementary and Manual Therapy › Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
chronic migraine, migraine prevalence, headache-related disability, episodic migraine, sociodemographic factors, household income, sex differences, age differences, Migraine Disability Assessment Scale, United States population, migraine epidemiology
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Chronic Disease, Disability Evaluation, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Migraine Disorders, Population Surveillance, United States, Prevalence, Young Adult

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