Talk:Cluster headache

message: This is false as people who suffer from cluster headaches have been known to commit suicide to stop the intense pain. Therefore, a cluster headache attack could be considered life threatening as it could cause a reasonable person to commit suicide that otherwise would have not ended their life if they did not suffer from such a condition. Source: http://umm.edu/health/medical/reports/articles/headaches-cluster Quote: More than half (55%) of respondents reported experiencing suicidal thoughts.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.95.181.125 (talk) 08:16, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The keyword here is "itself". A CH attack itself is not life-threatening. Suicidal thoughts and acting out on those are a possible indirect result of the attack. — al-Shimoni (talk) 04:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Cluster headache can be fatal if not managed properly. If the patient forgetfully eat some food items that increase the severity or frequency of attacks during the cluster his condition can aggravate seriously as he can not sleep between attacks. Sleep itself will trigger more attacks. Only very high doses of steroids like 2mg/kg/d may help in such situation. The tired, sleep deprived patient may need hospitalization. I think of this as Status of cluster headache. I find, as a patient and physician, the most serious food items that looks benign are fish, chocolates and bananas. Ezzsakr (talk) 13:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cluster headache attack itself is not life-threatening 

message: Please review WP:MEDRS and WP:MEDMOS, including WP:MEDMOS#Sections.  Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches helps understand how to apply Wikipedia's medical sourcing guidelines, and where/how to find secondary review sources.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical sourcing and content guidelines 

message: This article is rife with primary studies:  see WP:UNDUE, WP:RECENTISM, WP:NOT (news or a support forum), and WP:MEDRS.  I've removed this text for discussion. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary studies 

message: This article says the same things over and over and over, often based on primary sources, looking like individual researchers wanted to work their links in.  I'm reducing some of the redundant prose, but by no means all of it; that should be done better when the article is thoroughly rewritten to reflect more recent secondary reviews-- since the article is so poorly sourced, it's hardly worth it at this stage to clean up all the prose.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I put that Cochrane review in, but expansion needed.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

text: * I'm typically not a fan of listified prose, and another problem I have with the table at Atypical_facial_pain#Signs_and_symptoms is that the citations are disassociated from the text, and there's a whole long list of citations above the table where it's not apparent what is citing what.  I guess here, whatever works and whatever others want, but I don't think something like at AFP would ever get through FAC (just saying), where prose is preferred to lists and tables, and citations should be attached to the text they verify.  Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *Yes the table needs inline citation. That is a problem that needs fixing. It is not really MEDMOS to use socrates, in fact I recall there is something in there about not using mnemonics at all, but I think it is a nice structure to apply to the signs and symptoms section for conditions characterized mainly by pain. Lesion (talk) 00:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant, repetitive and off-topic prose 

message: We should remove all names of experts and researchers, and their quotes. Suggest only keep name of the person who discovered it (1974, Ekbom according to one source). Lesion (talk) 04:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes (unless we are directly quoting someone, in which case we need attribution).  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Depersonalize 

message: Is cluster headache not alternately referred to as CH?  Because switching many of the uses of the phrase cluster headache to CH in the article would probably shave 5KB !!  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think CH is commonly referred to as "CH," certainly not in the same way that multiple sclerosis is known as MS or tuberculosis as TB, but of course that's because cluster headaches aren't widely enough known to be shorthanded in that way by the general public (even though CH is as common among the US population as MS). I would suppose that as with any initialization, if you stated early in the piece that you were henceforward going to refer to cluster headache as CH, you could probably do that, but as I say, I don't think you'd be employing common usage. This usage, from the current entry, definitely seems wrong to me: "Restlessness (for example, pacing or rocking back and forth), photosensitivity, aversion to light (photophobia) or sensitivity to noise (phonophobia) may occur during a CH." "CH" is the condition; it is not properly used for individual headaches (which are called by people with CH "attacks" or "hits," since "headaches" is a ridiculous term to apply to them (medically proper though it may be)).  Chfather (talk) 01:20, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  CH? 

message: I noted that this article also uses "sufferer" in a few places. The MEDMOS discourages this, instead we should use more neutral wording like "persons with cluster headache". Lesion (talk) 01:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: , I was out all day, so got no Wiki work done, but I did have a chance to read through the article from my cell phone, and the prose is atrocious throughout.  I will engage again tomorrow or Sunday, read both Cochrane reviews, and before anything else, work on some of the worst parts of the prose.  Unless someone tells me not to, I will switch a lot of the repetitive "cluster headaches" to "CH".  Still have to find time to deal with all the primary sources.  Does anyone have a copy of the full text of the journal article referenced above by ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: >>The full text is here: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/738530  Chfather (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

text: I would like to do a general editing pass--not to mess with content but small edits in quite a few places that I think will add clarity.  I guess I could just do that (?) . . . but is there a way to somehow do it offline so that you-all don't think I'm trying to willfully impose myself on the published page?  For whatever it's worth, I'm a writer/editor by profession.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chfather (talk • contribs) 01:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  There has certainly been a problem in here with prose redundancy and unencylopedic, over-emotive language.  Separately, the clarification tag I put on nerve stimulators was removed.  We do not have an article for that, so we need to either create one, find one, or tell our readers what they are.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Emotive words

message: I think that was the most dangerous stuff. We have inline tags so have removed the banners from the lead. Feel free to replace them if you feel strongly. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 12:06, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Updated prevention and treatment sections

message: []
63 people interviewed.  The percentage of patients with pituitary abnormalities is interesting.  Plus, whoever wrote this CH wiki needs to find sources for the hypothalamus/timetable point.  This article should do it. If you wanna get the primary source, this neurologist from sweden has got it all written out for you, since I cant do it myself.  So use it if ya wanna.  It should be referenced.  It makes the most logical sense that the reason the headaches occur in the first place would be associated with the hypothalamus.  Ive had them for 4 years, every may for a month.  1 to 3 a day usually.  Sometimes i get a day off, but im waiting for it to kick in again the whole time i dont have the CH.  Needless to say, Im not looking forward to a month from now.     RossChapman311 (talk) 06:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Will read this review. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 06:14, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parts of this recent review should be cited in multiple areas in this wiki               [[User:RossChapman311|RossChapman311]] ([[User talk:RossChapman311|talk]]) 06:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 

message: "Valproate, sumatriptan and oxygen are not recommended as preventative measures" ref states "Based on current evidence, one review suggested that sumatriptan, valproate (Depacon), misoprostol (Cytotec), supplemental oxygen, cimetidine (Tagamet), and chlorpheniramine should not be used for preventive treatment"  Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: We state

message: Some news regarding causes:  - Open access. --Friedrich K. (talk) 13:59, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A primary source. We should try to use secondary sources per WP:MEDRS Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:19, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cluster headache. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.efns.org/files/guideline_49.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:49, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: All of this should be edited or removed:
"The cause is unknown.[2] Risk factors include a history of exposure to tobacco smoke and a family history of the condition.[2] Things that may trigger attacks include alcohol, and nitroglycerin.[2] They are a primary headache disorder of the trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias type.[2] Diagnosis is based on symptom.[2]
Recommended management include lifestyle changes such as avoiding potential triggers.[2]"
The text cited is from a 2013 source, and there have since been publications since then describing causes. Also, starting a paragraph about "recommended management" about "lifestyle changes" is irresponsible, since cluster headaches can very rarely be avoided, even if triggers are avoided (need to cite source).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oholleran (talk • contribs) 17:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree. Simple lifestyle changes if supported should be listed first. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:12, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introductory section should be revised 

message: Appears to be a very rare differential. As such IMO it is fine to simple go in the body of the article under differential and is not needed in the infobox. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Per here a total of 50 cases have been described. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26092511 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:39, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than listing all of them in the infobox what do you think about linking to the group Trigeminal autonomic cephalgia? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:40, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's fine for the infobox but the body should list the actual SUNCT syndrome entity. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

text: SUNCT syndrome JFW | T@lk 15:32, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: User:TylerDurden8823 agree and the body already explicitly lists it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:11, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, that sounds good. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:11, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing

message: doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30405-2 JFW | T@lk 15:32, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lancet Neurol, 

message: The Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry has an interesting piece about how becoming sexually aroused can make a cluster headache go away. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2077391/. Is this the only medical condition that can be "treated" by becoming sexually aroused? And does this raise ethical questions about whether health services could or should provide the means of becoming sexually aroused as a form of treatment? Matt Stan (talk) 15:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immediate improvement of cluster headaches after sexual activity 

message: The FDA recently approved an electrical stimulation device (marketed under the name "gammaCore)" to be used to treat cluster headaches. I don't have the expertise to update the "Management" section, but I recommend that someone with the requisite knowledge do so. [A 2018 FDA memo may be a good place to start.] I am aware that other similar devices may become FDA-approved for cluster headache treatment within the next few years, so a new subsection on "electric stimulation devices" may be in order.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbb01 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We should look for better sources. Was approved as simple "substantially equivalent"  to something else. So the device is not unique. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with respect to better sources. I also agree that the device is not unique. That is why I believe there could be a new, short section within the "Management" on electrical stimulation devices. No need to mention any particular device. I did find a mention of research on this treatment in the subsection on "Surgery," but (a) this is not a surgical procedure (other treatments in that section do require surgery), and (b) the only study cited in the section refers to TENS devices, which may be appropriate but I imagine more recent studies should be included as references as well. Drbb01 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 00:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update treatments to include electrical stimulation devices 

message: Ref does not make this claim. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:18, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: "Often" suicide?

message: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1738593/
it is used in the bodyWalidou47 (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It is primary. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this source primary or secondary ? 

message: I do not think we need a separate section for one sentence. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Neutral do not agree or disagree thanks.Walidou47 (talk) 17:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections for one sentence

message: The 2006 study referenced in 'research direction' is not really suitable for this section as it's misleading. The study concluded in 2006 and showed significant results in both the management and prevention of CH. I'd therefore like to remove this particular sentence and place the findings of this study under the 'other' sections within prevention and management. Is there any objection to this suggestion? JulianParge (talk) 16:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I had an answer to this as part of a contribution I tried to make under psilocybin for the same discussion. I won't amend anything. JulianParge (talk) 17:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research direction vs researched conclusions... 

message: What would be the best way to include ongoing research into what seems to be a remarkably effective treatment that has failed to gain much attention yet.
https://n.neurology.org/content/82/10_Supplement/P1.256
There is version/variant of the above protocol in a document "Suggested Headache Preventative Treatment Protocol" .... "prepared for neurologists, pain specialists, and primary care physicians who routinely treat patients with headaches."
https://www.tacsweb.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/suggested-ch-preventative-treatment-protocol-for-neurologists_07-07-17-1.pdf
Idyllic press (talk) 10:37, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other treatments 

message: Does Wikipedia even allow the content that's written here? All the statements have citations, but it sounds like it was written by a tobacco company. 184.176.138.209 (talk) 07:36, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tobacco smoking