# Talk:Migraine

doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30435-0 JFW | T@lk 13:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Migraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131206060123/http://www.choosingwisely.org/doctor-patient-lists/american-headache-society/ to http://www.choosingwisely.org/doctor-patient-lists/american-headache-society/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203001051/http://www.choosingwisely.org/doctor-patient-lists/american-headache-society/ to http://www.choosingwisely.org/doctor-patient-lists/american-headache-society/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:04, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Dodick: doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30478-1 JFW | T@lk 16:14, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

What is the cause of migraines? It is not explained clearly enough on the article.183.192.60.104 (talk) 13:01, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

The article says "The underlying causes of migraines are unknown".  I don't think you're going to get a clear explanation of what is the cause of migraines under those circumstances.  Deli nk (talk) 13:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Were does the ref support the claim in front of it?
"Certain probiotic strains, such as bifidobacteria, have also been found to help regulate serotonin production, which contributes to a reduction in  migraine frequency and severity."
Sarkar A, Lehto SM, Harty S, Dinan TG, Cryan JF, Burnet PW (November 2016). "Psychobiotics and the Manipulation of Bacteria–Gut–Brain Signals". Trends in Neurosciences. 39 (11): 763–781. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2016.09.002. ISSN 0166-2236. PMC 5102282. PMID 27793434.
The reference does not mention migraines. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:50, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Ref does not support this. Says they are used not that they work.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
It says why they are used. "Betel (Piper betle): Betel leaves have analgesic and cooling properties.
Clove (Syzygium aromaticum): The aroma of the clove has a headache-allaying effect. It can
soothe the nerves and bring it back to a pacified state.
Garlic (Allium sativum): Garlic has almost miraculous properties in relieving headaches, of
whatever type they are. Their juice slowly permeates the head region and acts as a painkiller.
Ginger (Zingiber officinale): Ginger has painkilling properties. Due to this property, it is used
as an external application on the affected head region. This gives relief from the headache."Walidou47 (talk) 11:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

What is "cooling properties"? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:42, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
You would have to ask the authorsWalidou47 (talk) 11:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
The book also promotes the use of homeopathy. Am trimming. Not a major medical textbooks. Not appropriate.
There are zero RCTs on garlic and headaches or migraines. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:42, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Aggreeing with trimming this book Thanks docWalidou47 (talk) 12:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

My suggestion is to pick another image in the infobox ("Woman with migraine headache")
I can assure you that not a single person suffering from an ongoing migraine will look straight into a lamp. Most people suffering from migraine avoid any light at all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Topfenbaecker (talk • contribs) 10:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC) 

What do you suggest? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:25, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
I agree with Topfenbaecker. The current image is too stylized. A crop of this image (licensed CC BY 2.0) would be a good image. The model's face is in light and his hand position appears to demonstrate the aura phase. It's not perfect (ideally the model would be female), but I think it's better than the current image. userdude 20:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC); edited 13:27, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

It states "We found significant reduction of monthly headache days"[1]

This is not the treatment of acute headaches but decreasing the frequency of HAs. Have grouped with other discussion on the topic. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:24, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

(Excuse me for reaching the routine of adding new sections at the end of the page but as an IP user used to the prerogative of an admin, for something like15 years, I find a little hard to adapt to the role of an IP user, putting up with various indignities that go along with the combination of that and use of an iPad. For instance. For instance, I have great disdain for colleagues who think a talk page is just like those chat pages or message servers where time goes back where did you read down the page, yet here I am forced by the software to create a new section at the top of the page in order to point out the problem that concerns me. “Typically, episodes affect one half of the head,...” is grossly confusing, even though Wikipedia has no *requirement* for exercising responsibility in talking about medical matters. I am not a doctor, but I’ve hung around with enough doctors, and paid enough attention, to know that the top and bottom of the head are not complementary, even though the two sides of the brain, and therefore perceptions based on brain function, are subject to important symmetries. In this case left brain and right brain tumors are common compared to tumors restricted to the left or right side of the brain, and far more common than those affecting the upper and lower halves or front and back of the brain.The edit software is fighting my efforts to clean it up properly, and thwarting me, if not definitively, up to my tolerance limit. No one has seen fit to fix the goofy info, and this is me givin’ i’ my bes’shot.—2601:199:C201:FD70:9C34:6D48:7EC7:B307 (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)(ex-user:Jerzy)

Fixed ... changed "half" to "side" where appropriate. Graham87 05:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Flickering animation really needs some kind of a warning lable - it could trigger serious reactions for people watching it !--౪ Santa ౪99° 16:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

A seizure warning was added but has been recently removed. I've reverted the removal although there seems to be some doubt as to whether it is permissible to have warnings on Wikipedia pages. Hopefully further discussion will clarify whether or not this is the case. Stroness (talk) 11:05, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:No disclaimers provides a consensus (not a policy, it has to be noted) that disclaimers should not be used although it also lists a few exceptions where they are permitted. It seems that accidentally causing a seizure or triggering a migraine has not been included amongst those exceptions. Until such a time when such a warning is allowed, the responsible thing to do would be to remove the image/animation in question and that has now been done. I'm not sure how best to go about requesting such an exception so I'm open to suggestions & assistance with this. Stroness (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
@Stroness: -- best option would be to post on the village pump. We recently added a disambiguation link on suicide to include suicide prevention which violated another consensus regarding no disclaimers, and this decision resulted from an RFC there.
Also, I wonder if there's a way to indicate that there's a seizure risk without it looking like a disclaimer. For example, on the page about that episode of Pokemon which caused seizures, there is no disclaimer, but it's fairly intuitive that the animation should not be watched by those prone to seizures, because of the subject of the article. On the other hand, I don't see any images or animations on (for example) Reflex seizure. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 01:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

The article contains a sentence that describes that caffeine in combination with over-the-counter analgesics can be an effective first-line treatment for migraine headache, although Caffeine is not a recommended therapy in most clinical situations. Consider removing and only discussing over-the-counter analgesics.
Edit 8/23/2023 -- I went ahead with this change due to lack of feedback. It reads much better now with more clinically accurate information in the introduction, with caffeine still being discussed in the dedicated analgesics section.

Please share opinions AGIwithTheBraids (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Help would be appreciated updating a lot of the sources for this article. It contains a lot of outdated information regarding migraine pathophysiology, migraine variants, and the disease in general. There is plenty  of more up-to-date literature, but the volume is substantial. AGIwithTheBraids (talk) 01:12, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi AGIwithTheBraids, sorry I'm late to the party. I'm available if you'd still like another set of eyes/hands to help with updating. Feel free to direct me to a particular section(s) or source(s) if you prefer. Otherwise I'll mostly (slowly) go top to bottom. Ajpolino (talk) 14:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
@AGIwithTheBraids I'll agree to help with Ajpolino, but it's quite difficult to know what you're talking about as you haven't provided any specific parts that are outdated. —Panamitsu (talk) 21:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Since medicine-related topics evolve so fast, we typically consider sources older than five years to be an indication that we should look into a topic to see if things have changed (guideline at WP:MEDDATE). It's not a brightline rule, and certainly not an emergency, but any updating we can get to will certainly help. I think I'll start with the Epidemiology section (no particular reason, happy to do another section if someone tells me to). If there's a particular element of migraines that interest you, feel free to start there. If you need help accessing sources or interpreting anything, feel free to post back here and we can put our heads together. Ajpolino (talk) 18:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi. I’ve updated the definition of migraine to align with current terminology. And I’ve updated the reference to the latest Sage Journal International Classification of Headache Disorders. I've also added some information about new migraine preventative drugs. I agree, many of these citations are old and out of date. I will continue adding and tweaking language and citations as our understanding of migraine is evolving quickly. Withatee (talk) 01:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi -- thank you so much. I did revert some of the edits in terms of preventing the circular definition of the term 'migraine' with 'migraine'. I know you defined this later, but the current definition uses the one provided in StatPearls with the international headache society definition.
If you disagree, maybe we can find a definition that isn't as circular. I do think "headache" needs to be in there, as it is with most definitions of migraine disease.
Thanks, and cheerio! AGIwithTheBraids (talk) 23:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi, no worries. That's totally fine with me. The extra additions look good too. Thanks :) Withatee (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Zefr: I refer to
your edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Migraine&oldid=prev&diff=1199500815 (where you reverted my edit where I fixed an error).
When the display-authors limitation is set in the main template "cs1 config", as in this page, then this setting applies to all citations. There is no need to set it additionally in each citation if it is already set in the "cs1 config". If this option is set in both config and individual citation, the articles go to the "error" / "warning" category "CS1 maint: overridden setting". My edits fix this problem and remove pages from this "CS1 maint: overridden setting" category. In that particular edit, the page already has "{{cs1 config |name-list-style=vanc |display-authors=6}}", so if the page has a duplicate "name-list-style=vanc" or "display-authors=6" in each individual "{{cite}}" or at least in one {{cite}}, then the page will go to the error category, "CS1 maint: overridden setting", as you can see. Before my edit, the page was in "CS1 maint: overridden setting". My edit removed the page from this category. Therefore, please consider restoring my edit.
You mentioned "Pointless edits - limited authors need to be dispayed - WHY these unwanted edits?" -- but if you see, this limitation is already imposed by "cs1 config".
Thank you!
Maxim Masiutin (talk) 07:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, why not mention that the father of modern medicine, Al Zahravi did temporal vein ligations to alleviate migraine? It would seem to me an incredibly cogent time point in history. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 17:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Please add a legend or otherwise define the graph's labels: MA, MO, MAMO.  
Also, I'd suggest a line style change.  Instead of six different line colors, I'd suggest two colors, to differentiate male/female.  Then two unique patterns of dashed/dotted lines and a solid line corresponding to MA, MO, MAMO.  This way, you could quickly see the useful differences between sexes and types. Cmjanicki (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

"Thank you, Awaz, for your recent contributions in adding references and improving the article’s sourcing. I appreciate your effort in strengthening the reliability of the content. I have a few additional suggestions that could further enhance the article, including updates on global migraine statistics, chronic migraine risk factors, some citation improvement and comorbidities. Here are my proposed changes:"

Replace FDA Website Citation with a Systematic Review
Instead of citing the FDA website for CGRP inhibitor approvals, consider referencing a systematic review that evaluates the FDA approval process and the clinical evidence behind CGRP inhibitors. This would provide a more comprehensive and scholarly source.
2. Enhance Global Epidemiological Data

According to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Report 2019, there were approximately 581.8 million cases of migraine worldwide. Additionally, more recent estimates indicate that migraine affects around 1.1 billion people globally, accounting for 14% of the world’s population in 2019. Updating the article with these figures would improve its accuracy and global relevance
3. Discuss Comorbidities Affecting Migraine Onset and Management

Adding information on comorbid conditions associated with increased migraine onset and worse disease outcomes—such as anxiety, depression, fibromyalgia, arthritis, obesity, hypertension, asthma, allergies, metabolic syndrome, angina, gastrointestinal disorders and sleep disturbances—would improve the article’s discussion on disease burden and management challenges.
4. Highlight Migraine’s Global Disability Ranking

Migraine remains the second leading cause of disability worldwide according to the GBD 2019 study, and it is the leading cause of disability among young women. Updating the article to reflect these findings would underscore its significant public health impact.
Mulkih (talk) 14:20, 5 March 2025 (UTC)