Cited by 18Migraine and Headache StudiesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationTemporomandibular Joint Disorders

Development and validation of a telephone classification interview for common chronic headache disorders

Open access
Potter, Rachel, Hee, Siew Wan, Griffiths, Frances, Dodd, Katherine, Hoverd, Eleanor, Underwood, Martin, Matharu, Manjit·2019·The Journal of Headache and Pain

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For a trial of supportive self-management for people with chronic headache we needed to develop and validate a telephone classification interview that can be used by a non-headache specialist to classify common chronic headache types in primary care. We aimed to specifically: exclude secondary headaches other than medication overuse, exclude primary headache disorders other than migraine and tension type headache (TTH), distinguish between chronic migraine and chronic TTH, and identify medication overuse headache. METHODS: We held a headache classification consensus conference to draw on evidence and expertise to inform the content of a logic model underpinning the classification interview. Nurses trained to use the logic model did telephone classification interviews with participants recruited from primary care. Doctors specialising in headache did a second validation interview. RESULTS: Twenty-six delegates attended the headache classification conference including headache specialist doctors, nurses and lay representatives (with chronic headache). We trained six nurses to do the classification interviews and completed 107 paired interviews, median days between interviews was 32 days (interquartile range 21-48 days). We measured level of agreement between the nurse and doctor interviews using proportion of concordance, simple kappa and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). Proportion of concordance of agreement between nurse and doctor interviews was 0.76, simple kappa coefficient κ 0.31 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.52), and PABAK 0.51 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.68), a moderate agreement. In a sensitivity test following review of headache characteristics recorded, concordance was 0.91, κ = 0.53 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.79), and PABAK = 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.92), a very good agreement. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated a new evidence-based telephone classification interview that can be used by a non-headache specialist to classify common chronic headache types in primary care.

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 · 10.1186/s10194-018-0954-z

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Potter, R., Hee, S. W., Griffiths, F., Dodd, K., Hoverd, E., Underwood, M., & Matharu, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Warwick (GB)
  • National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB)
Corresponding author
Potter, Rachel
Venue
The Journal of Headache and Pain
Published
2019-01-08
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
2-2
ISSN
  • 1129-2369 (ISSN-L)
  • 1129-2377
OpenAlex
W2939257103
Cited by
18
References
15
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Headache and Pain (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health Research (RP-PG-1212-20018)
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
chronic headache, headache classification, telephone interviews, chronic migraine, tension-type headache, medication overuse headache, secondary headache, interobserver agreement, primary care
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Headache Disorders

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