ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

To examine the relationship between migraine and major depression, by estimating the risk for first-onset major depression associated with prior migraine and the risk for first migraine associated with prior major depression. We also examined the extent to which comorbidity with major depression is specific to migraine or is observed in other severe headaches. Representative samples of persons 25 to 55 years of age with migraine or other severe headaches (i.e., disabling headaches without migraine features) and controls with no history of severe headaches were identified by a telephone survey and later interviewed in person to ascertain history of common psychiatric disorders. Lifetime prevalence of major depression was approximately three times higher in persons with migraine and in persons with severe headaches compared with controls. Significant bidirectional relationships were observed between major depression and migraine, with migraine predicting first-onset depression and depression predicting first-onset migraine. In contrast, persons with severe headaches had a higher incidence of first-onset major depression (hazard ratio = 3.6), but major depression did not predict a significantly increased incidence of other severe headaches (hazard ratio = 1.6). The contrasting results regarding the relationship of major depression with migraine versus other severe headaches suggest that different causes may underlie the co-occurrence of major depression in persons with migraine compared with persons with other severe headaches.
2000;54;308- Neurology
N. Breslau, L. R. Schultz, W. F. Stewart, R. B. Lipton, V. C. Lucia and K. M. A. Welch
Headache and major depression: Is the association specific to migraine?
This information is current as of June 5, 2006
http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/full/54/2/308
located on the World Wide Web at:
The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is
Print ISSN: 0028-3878. Online ISSN: 1526-632X.
published continuously since 1951. Copyright © 2000 by AAN Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved.
Neurology is the official journal of AAN Enterprises, Inc. A bi-monthly publication, it has been
at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
Headache and major depression
Is the association specific to migraine?
N. Breslau, PhD; L.R. Schultz, PhD; W.F. Stewart, PhD, MPH; R.B. Lipton, MD; V.C. Lucia, MA;
and K.M.A. Welch, MD
Article abstract—Objective: To examine the relationship between migraine and major depression, by estimating the risk
for first-onset major depression associated with prior migraine and the risk for first migraine associated with prior major
depression. We also examined the extent to which comorbidity with major depression is specific to migraine or is observed
in other severe headaches. Methods: Representative samples of persons 25 to 55 years of age with migraine or other severe
headaches (i.e., disabling headaches without migraine features) and controls with no history of severe headaches were
identified by a telephone survey and later interviewed in person to ascertain history of common psychiatric disorders.
Results: Lifetime prevalence of major depression was approximately three times higher in persons with migraine and in
persons with severe headaches compared with controls. Significant bidirectional relationships were observed between major
edepression and migraine, with migraine predicting first-onset depression and depression predicting first-onset migraine.
In contrast, persons with severe headaches had a higher incidence of first-onset major depression (hazard ratio 53.6), but
major depression did not predict a significantly increased incidence of other severe headaches (hazard ratio 51.6).
Conclusions: The contrasting results regarding the relationship of major depression with migraine versus other severe
headaches suggest that different causes may underlie the co-occurrence of major depression in persons with migraine
compared with persons with other severe headaches. Key words: Migraine—Comorbidity—Major depression—
Epidemiology.
NEUROLOGY 2000;54:308–313
Epidemiologic studies report an association between
migraine headache and major depression.
1-8
The as-
sociation might be noncausal, reflecting shared
genetic or environmental causes. Alternatively, mi-
graine might cause major depression or might be
caused by it. The hypothesis that depression in per-
sons with migraine reflects a psychological response
to the stress of recurrent severe headaches would
predict an influence only from migraine to depres-
sion but not from depression to migraine. In con-
trast, the hypothesis of shared causes would predict
that each disorder would increase the risk of the
first-time occurrence of the other. We previously re-
ported, based on prospective data, bidirectional influ-
ences between migraine and major depression, with
each disorder increasing the risk of first onset of the
other.
5
These findings dampen the plausibility that
the migraine–depression association is caused by the
demoralizing experience of recurrent and disabling
headaches and suggest the shared-causes hypothesis.
Depression has been linked to other pain
conditions.
9-14
Reciprocal psychological effects of
pain and depressive symptoms have been postu-
lated: pain precipitates worry and pessimism, and
distress impairs the ability to cope with pain.
15,16
These findings call into question the specificity of
the migraine–major depression association. Is non-
migraine severe headache also associated with ma-
jor depression? Are there bidirectional influences in
relation to nonmigraine severe headache? A previ-
ous epidemiologic survey reported a higher preva-
lence of major depression in persons with migraine
headache but not tension-type headache.
7
However,
as the authors noted, the difference in the rates of
comorbid major depression between these headache
types might be explained by differences in headache
severity.
In this study, we address the migraine–major de-
pression comorbidity in a large-scale epidemiologic
study, the Detroit Area Study of Headache. We first
estimate the lifetime prevalence of major depression
in persons with migraine, persons with other severe
headaches of comparable pain intensity and disabil-
ity, and persons with no history of severe headaches.
We then examine the relationship between migraine
and major depression, by estimating the risk for the
onset of major depression in persons with prior mi-
graine and the risk for the onset of migraine in per-
sons with prior major depression. We compare these
results with the results from a corresponding analysis
of the relationship between major depression and se-
vere headaches other than migraine.
From the Departments of Psychiatry (Dr. Breslau and V.C. Lucia) and Biostatistics and Research Epidemiology (Drs. Breslau and Shultz), Henry Ford
Health System, Detroit, MI; the Department of Psychiatry (Dr. Breslau), Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH; the
Department of Psychiatry (Dr. Breslau), University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI; Innovative Medical Research (Drs. Stewart and Lipton),
Baltimore, MD; and the University of Kansas School of Medicine (Dr. Welch), Kansas, MS.
Supported by NIH Headache Research Center (Bethesda, MD) grant P50 NS32399.
Received May 24, 1999. Accepted in final form August 27, 1999.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Naomi Breslau, Director of Research, Department of Psychiatry, Henry Ford Health System, One Ford
Place, 3A, Detroit, MI 48202-3450; e-mail: nbresla1@hfhs.org
308 Copyright © 2000 by the American Academy of Neurology at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
Methods. Sample and data. The Detroit Area Study of
Headache was designed to identify representative samples
of the general population with migraine or other severe
headaches and controls with no history of headache, and to
ascertain the prevalence of major depression in each
group. The study was conducted in two phases. In the first
phase, a large-scale random-digit dialing
17
telephone sur-
vey was conducted to identify the three population groups.
In the second phase, face-to-face interviews were conducted
with subsets of persons identified in the telephone survey
(i.e., those with migraine, those with severe headaches, and
controls) to assess common psychiatric disorders.
Telephone survey. The target population was the tri-
county area of Wayne, Macomb, and Oakland, Michigan,
which contained 3.9 million of the total 4.3 million resi-
dents of the Detroit, Michigan, primary metropolitan
statistical area at the time of the 1990 census.
18
The
random-digit dialing methods are appropriate in this
geographic area, because virtually all households
(.97%) had a telephone according to the 1990 census.
18
Persons 25 to 55 years old were targeted, based on pre-
vious findings indicating that persons younger than 25
or older than 55 years of age have considerably lower
rates of migraine.
19
Screening was completed in 82.5% of
households, and the cooperation rate in eligible house-
holds was 70%. Data were gathered on 4,765 persons 25
to 55 years of age.
A computer-assisted telephone interview was used. Re-
spondents were asked if they had experienced at least one
headache in the last year not caused by a head injury,
hangover, or illness. The number of different types of head-
aches each respondent experienced in the last year was
ascertained. Detailed questions about the International
Headache Society (IHS)
20
defining features of migraine,
age at onset, and associated impairment were first asked
about the most severe type of headache experienced in the
last year. If more than one type of headache was reported,
the same series of questions was asked about the second
most severe headache type.
21
The validity of the diagnosis for migraine by computer-
assisted telephone interview has been assessed in
population-based studies in the United States and the
United Kingdom. In each country, a population sample of
persons who met telephone-screening criteria for migraine
and a sample that did not were independently evaluated
by clinicians, using a semistructured interview for head-
ache diagnosis that has been extensively used in clinical
trials. Clinicians were blind to the telephone-screening di-
agnosis when applying IHS criteria. In both studies, the
positive predictive value of the telephone interview for the
diagnosis of migraine was approximately 94%.
22,23
The household interview: ascertaining psychiatric his-
tory. Of the 4,765 persons interviewed in the random-
digit dialing telephone survey, 1,696 were selected for psy-
chiatric assessment via face-to-face interviews. The sample
included all those who met IHS criteria for migraine in the
survey (n 5683), all those who experienced headaches
other than migraine and also met study criteria for severe
headache (described subsequently) (n 5253), and a subset
of the remaining subjects serving as controls (n 5760).
Control subjects were frequency-matched to the migraine
subset by sex, age (within 5 years), and race. (Eligibility
criteria for controls are described subsequently.) A total of
1,287 subjects (75.9%) completed face-to-face interviews.
Participation varied by age, race, and level of education; it
was higher in older persons, in white subjects, and in per-
sons with more education. Participation also varied across
the three diagnostic groups, with the highest rate of partic-
ipation reached in the migraine group and the lowest in
the severe headache group. However, these differences in
participation were small. Participation rate did not vary
between the sexes.
Household interviews of headache patients were con-
ducted between July 1996 and January 1998, usually
within 2 to 4 weeks of the telephone interview. Interviews
of controls began in October 1996. Trained lay interview-
ers conducted the household interviews, using a computer-
assisted personal interview. Assessment of psychiatric
disorders was by the Composit International Diagnostic
Interview, version 2.1,
24
a fully structured interview sched-
ule that generates psychiatric disorders according to the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
4th ed (DSM-IV).
25
Studies of this interview in general-
population samples showed high reliability for most diag-
noses, including major depression.
26
Definition of the three subject groups and key variables.
The classification of respondents into the three diagnostic
groups—migraine, severe headache, and controls—was
based on information about the two worst headache types
experienced in the last year identified in the telephone
interview. Migraine was defined according to the IHS cri-
teria for migraine with and without aura.
20
The two mi-
graine types were mutually exclusive, and migraine
without aura was diagnosed only in persons with no mi-
graine with aura. The definition of severe headache re-
quired headache duration of 4 to 72 hours (i.e., the same
duration criterion used in the IHS to define migraine); no
history of nausea, vomiting, photophobia, or phonophobia
associated with a headache; and a specified minimum
headache impact score on the Headache Impact Question-
naire (HImQ), described subsequently. Of the pool of re-
spondents with nonmigraine headaches, only 11.6% met
these eligibility criteria.
Controls could not meet criteria for either migraine or
severe headache; could not report a history of nausea, vom-
iting, photophobia, or phonophobia associated with a head-
ache; and could not have ever experienced headaches with
a pain severity score greater than 2 on a scale from 0 to 10
(i.e., mild).
The exclusionary rule with respect to nausea, vomiting,
photophobia, and phonophobia used in the definition of the
severe headache and control groups was intended to ex-
clude persons who might fit the IHS category of “migrain-
ous disorder not fulfilling above [migraine] criteria.”
Although the diagnostic definition of this category states
that it applies if “all but one” of the migraine criteria are
met, a high index of suspicion for migraine is raised by the
presence of nausea and vomiting or photophobia and pho-
nophobia, which are the prototypic symptoms in migraine.
This rule ensured that migraine sufferers were excluded
from the severe headache and control groups.
The HImQ was used to define headache severity.
22,23
The HImQ is the sum of two component measures: average
pain intensity (10-point scale) and total lost time in each
January (2 of 2) 2000 NEUROLOGY 54 309
at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
of three domains of activity, expressed as lost days. Lost
time was derived as the sum of actual missed days in work
for pay or school, in household work, and in nonwork ac-
tivities (i.e., family, social, or recreation) plus reduced-
effectiveness day equivalents. This is the average
percentage of reduced effectiveness resulting from a head-
ache multiplied by the number of headaches (adjusted for
missed days in each domain). For the severe headache
group, a minimum HImQ of 38.05 was required, to approx-
imate the HImQ distribution of this group to the HImQ
distribution of the migraine group.
Major depression is defined in the DSM-IV by the pres-
ence of at least five from a list of nine symptoms occurring
within the same 2-week period, with at least one of the
symptoms pertaining to a depressed mood or loss of inter-
est or pleasure. The symptom groups are dysphoria, loss of
interest or pleasure, weight loss or weight gain, insomnia
or hypersomnia, psychomotor agitation or retardation, fa-
tigue, feelings of worthlessness or excessive guilt, concen-
tration problems, and suicidal ideations or attempts.
Statistical analysis. To estimate the risk for the first
occurrence of migraine associated with prior major depres-
sion and the risk for depression associated with prior mi-
graine, we used Cox proportional hazards models with
time-dependent covariates.
27-29
The hazard ratio calculated
in this model estimates the risk for first occurrence of the
outcome (e.g., migraine) in persons with the risk factor of
interest (e.g., major depression) compared with persons
without the risk factor. Time was defined as chronologic
age. Persons who had not experienced the outcome by the
time of the interview were censored. Similar Cox propor-
tional hazards models were used to estimate the risk for
the first occurrence of severe headache associated with
major depression and vice versa. Analyses that focus on
the migraine–major depression relationship excluded per-
sons in the severe headache group. Analyses that focused
on the severe headache–major depression relationship ex-
cluded the migraine group. Cases with onset of headache
and major depression in the same year were censored just
before the year in which these events occurred, because
information on chronologic order was not available.
Cox proportional hazards models, unlike logistic regres-
sion, take into account differences across individuals in the
period of risk for the outcome. The added advantage of
models with time-dependent covariates is that they allow
consideration of independent variables that change over
time. For example, a person’s status with respect to major
depression can change from no major depression to major
depression at any time until the age at first migraine at-
tack or censoring. The parameter estimate (b) in the Cox
proportional hazards model is a regression coefficient from
which the hazard ratio can be obtained by taking the anti-
logarithm of the parameter estimate.
To estimate the risk for first-onset major depression
associated with prior migraine with aura and migraine
without aura, we used Cox proportional hazards models
with two time-dependent covariates. To estimate the risks
for the first occurrence of migraine with aura and migraine
without aura associated with prior major depression, we
used competing risks analysis, in which the occurrence of
one type of outcome removes (censors) the subject from
risk for the other outcome.
30
x
2
analysis was used to test
the difference between the two coefficients. The SAS (Cary,
NC) procedure for proportional hazards regression was
used.
31
Results. Description of subsamples. On sex, race, and
age—the three variables on which controls were matched
to the migraine group—small differences were detected
between the two groups (table 1). Controls had a higher
proportion of college graduates than the two headache
groups. The small differences between the migraine group
and the controls, despite the matching scheme, result from
differences in participation rates in the household inter-
view. Of the total migraine group, 29.5% met criteria for
migraine with aura. The severe headache group comprised
persons with tension-type headache (58.8%), persons meet-
ing IHS criteria for migrainous disorder (i.e., meeting all
criteria except for nausea or vomiting and photophobia
plus phonophobia; 33%), and other undiagnosed headaches
(11.2%).
Lifetime association of major depression with migraine
and severe headache. Both the migraine and the severe
headache groups had markedly higher lifetime prevalences
of major depression than the controls (table 2). The sex-
adjusted odds ratios of major depression associated with
each of the headache types were greater than 3 and were
not significantly different from one another (Wald x
2
5
Table 1 Distribution of sex, race, age, and education in the three
diagnostic groups
Characteristic
Migraine,
n5536
Severe headache,*
n5162
Controls,
n5586
Female sex, % 83.0 64.8 76.8
Race, %
White 75.9 72.2 69.5
Black 19.4 23.5 24.7
Other 4.7 4.3 5.8
Age, y, mean (SD) 40.3 (8.3) 40.0 (8.1) 40.7 (8.9)
Education, %
,High school 5.8 5.6 5.7
High school 33.4 26.5 33.1
Some college 34.0 40.7 26.0
$College 26.8 27.2 35.2
* Other than migraine as defined by study criteria.
Table 2 Lifetime prevalence of major depression in migraine,
severe headache, and controls, and sex-adjusted odds ratios (OR)
(n 51,284)
Group
Major
depression, %
Sex-adjusted OR*
(95% CI)
Migraine, n 5536 40.7 3.51 (2.64, 4.64)
With aura, n 5158 49.4 4.90 (3.34, 7.19)
Without aura, n 5378 37.0 3.03 (2.23, 4.11)
Severe headache,† n 5162 35.8 3.18 (2.14, 4.73)
Controls, n 5586 16.0 1.00
* From multivariable logistic regression.
† Other than migraine as defined by study criteria.
310 NEUROLOGY 54 January (2 of 2) 2000 at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
0.26, 1 df,p50.61). We tested the interaction between sex
and headache type with respect to the odds for major de-
pression, but detected no evidence of a significant interac-
tion (Wald x
2
53.20, 2 df,p50.20). A logistic regression
model that also included education as a covariate did not
alter the estimates. Within the severe headache group, the
lifetime prevalence of major depression was higher in per-
sons with migrainous disorders not fulfilling migraine cri-
teria than in persons with tension-type headache, 42.1%
versus 30.1%, respectively. We also found that in the ma-
jority of comorbid cases, the onset of headache preceded
the onset of major depression.
The lifetime prevalence of major depression was higher
in persons with migraine with aura than in persons with
migraine without aura (see table 2). The difference was
statistically significant (Wald x
2
56.198, 1 df,p50.013).
Migraine and major depression: examining the influence of
each condition on the first occurrence of the other. Previous
migraine and first onset of major depression. Using a Cox
proportional hazards model with migraine as a time-
dependent covariate, we estimated the hazard ratio of the
first onset of major depression associated with previous
migraine, controlling for sex. Persons with severe head-
ache were excluded. The sex-adjusted hazard ratio of the
first onset of major depression in persons with previous
migraine was 2.35 (95% CI 1.84 to 3.01). In a separate
model we tested the interaction between prior migraine
and sex but found no evidence for it (Wald x
2
50.455, 1 df,
p50.49). Including subjects’ education in the model did
not alter the results.
Previous major depression and first occurrence of mi-
graine. Estimated in a Cox proportional hazards model
with major depression as a time-dependent covariate and
controlling for sex, the hazard ratio for the first occurrence
of migraine in persons with prior major depression was
2.75 (95% CI 2.17 to 3.48). No significant sex interaction
was detected (Wald x
2
51.60, p50.20). Subjects’ educa-
tion had a significant inverse relationship with migraine
(Wald x
2
55.61, 1 df,p,0.02). However, the inclusion of
education in the model did not alter the hazard ratio of
migraine associated with prior major depression.
Migraine with aura and migraine without aura. The
sex-adjusted hazard ratio of the first onset of major depres-
sion associated with prior migraine with aura was 2.81
(95% CI 1.95 to 4.04), and with prior migraine without
aura, 2.18 (95% CI 1.65 to 2.88). The two estimates are not
significantly different (x
2
51.55, 1 df,p50.21). Estimat-
ing the influence in the reverse direction, from major de-
pression to each of the two migraine subtypes, we found
that the sex-adjusted hazard ratio of the first occurrence of
migraine with aura associated with prior major depression
was 3.98 (95% CI 2.70 to 5.86) and of the first migraine
without aura, 2.22 (95% CI 1.65 to 2.98), using competing
risks analysis
30
(x
2
for the difference between the two esti-
mates 55.56, 1 df,p50.018).
Severe headache and major depression: are there influ-
ences in both directions? Prior severe headache and first
onset of major depression. Using Cox proportional haz-
ards model with severe headache as a time-dependent co-
variate and controlling for sex, we estimated the hazard
ratio of first onset of major depression in persons with
prior severe headache relative to persons with no prior
severe headache. Persons with migraine were excluded.
The adjusted hazard ratio of first onset of major depression
associated with prior severe headache was 3.56 (95% CI
2.38 to 5.32). No evidence of sex interaction was detected
(Wald x
2
50.52, 1 df,p50.47). Education had no associ-
ation with major depression and its inclusion in the model
did not alter the results.
Prior major depression and first occurrence of severe
headache. Estimating the relationship in the reverse di-
rection, from prior major depression to first severe head-
ache, and applying the same statistical model, we found
that the sex-adjusted hazard ratio was 1.63 (95% CI 0.94
to 2.83; Wald x
2
53.08, 1 df,p50.08). No significant sex
interaction was detected (Wald x
2
51.10, 1 df,p50.29).
Education had an inverse relationship with severe head-
ache that did not reach statistical significance (Wald x
2
5
3.62, 1 df,p50.06). Controlling for education did not alter
the results.
A summary of the results of these analyses appears in
table 3.
Discussion. The key findings of this study are as
follows:
1. The lifetime prevalence of major depression was
threefold higher in persons with migraine and in
persons with severe headache, compared with
persons with no history of severe headache.
2. The lifetime prevalence of major depression in
persons with migraine with aura was significantly
higher than in persons with migraine without
aura.
3. A bidirectional relationship between migraine and
depression was observed: migraine signaled an in-
creased risk for the first onset of major depres-
sion, and major depression signaled an increased
risk for the first time occurrence of migraine.
4. In contrast, severe headache signaled an in-
creased risk for major depression, but there was
no evidence of a significant influence in the re-
verse direction, from major depression to severe
headache.
Table 3 Estimates of the risk of major depression associated with headache and vice versa by headache type
Association All migraine With aura Without aura Severe headache*
Headache to major depression 2.35 (1.84, 3.01) 2.81 (1.95, 4.04) 2.18 (1.65, 2.88) 3.56 (2.38, 5.32)
Major depression to headache 2.75 (2.17, 3.48) 3.98 (2.70, 5.86) 2.22 (1.65, 2.98) 1.63 (.94, 2.83)
Values are sex-adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI). Sex-adjusted hazard ratios estimated in Cox proportional hazards models with time-
dependent covariates.
* Other than migraine as defined by study criteria.
January (2 of 2) 2000 NEUROLOGY 54 311
at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
The findings confirm other reports on the life-
time association between migraine and major
depression.
1-4,6-8
They also replicate our previous
findings based on prospective data that showed sig-
nificant influences from migraine to the first onset of
major depression and from major depression to the
first occurrence of migraine.
5
They suggest that the
migraine–major depression association is unlikely to
be a psychological reaction to the demoralizing expe-
rience of recurrent headaches and suggest shared
causes, an explanation consistent with evidence that
similar neurochemical abnormalities might be impli-
cated in both conditions.
32
Our findings also confirm previous reports con-
cerning the status of migraine relative to other head-
ache types, with respect to headache severity and
associated impairment. They show that, although
only 17.3% of persons with nonmigraine headaches
scored above the impairment threshold used in this
study to define severe headaches, 70.5% of those
with migraine did so.
The evidence on the relationship between major
depression and severe headache, a category of non-
migraine headaches scoring above a specified level of
severity and disability, cannot be readily compared
with findings from other studies. The severe head-
ache category includes tension-type headache and
other nonmigraine headaches of considerable sever-
ity. Previous studies reported a higher prevalence of
major depression and higher scores on depression
scales in persons with undifferentiated recurrent
headaches compared with persons with no head-
aches.
9,15
Merikangas et al.
7
reported that the preva-
lence of major depression was not elevated in
persons with tension-type headaches, compared with
persons with no history of headaches. However, in
that study, severity of headache was not taken into
account, and persons with tension-type headache
whose headaches were milder than the typical mi-
graine headache were not excluded from the compar-
ison. Based on the large sample of our telephone
survey, most persons who met the IHS criteria for
tension-type headache (89%) scored below the 30th
percentile of the distribution of impairment scores of
the migraine group.
In contrast with the bidirectional association of
migraine and major depression, the association of
severe headache and major depression was found to
flow primarily in one direction, from severe headache
to major depression. This disparate pattern of re-
sults suggests the possibility that different causes
might account for the comorbidity of major depres-
sion in these two headache categories. The results
for migraine suggest shared causes, whereas those
for severe headache suggest a causal effect of head-
aches on major depression. To the extent that the
inclusion of persons with “partial” migraine in
the severe headache group might have influenced
the results, it could have only attenuated the differ-
ences between the two observed patterns.
The results suggest that migraine with aura
might have a stronger relationship with major de-
pression than migraine without aura: the lifetime
prevalence of major depression was higher in per-
sons with migraine with aura than without aura,
and major depression increased the risk for first oc-
currence of migraine with aura significantly more
than for migraine without aura. This finding is con-
sistent with previous reports.
3,7
The higher risk con-
ferred by major depression for migraine with aura
versus migraine without aura might account for the
observed difference in the lifetime association. The
scientific implications and clinical significance of
these differences are uncertain and require further
investigation in prospective studies.
Several caveats are in order. First, although we
applied a statistical approach that takes into account
the temporal order between the onset of major de-
pression and the onset of headaches, the data are
based on retrospective accounts of age at onset and
are subject to recall errors. Clearly, prospective data
would provide more accurate information on the inci-
dence of major depression in persons with migraine
or severe headache, and vice versa. Nonetheless,
there is no reason to suspect that recall errors could
have biased the results. Furthermore, information
on history of migraine and other headaches was
gathered in the telephone interview, whereas infor-
mation on history of major depression was gathered
in the follow-up household interview. Respondents
were unaware of our interest in the relationship of
their headache history with major depression or the
chronologic sequence between various disorders. Sec-
ond, the subset of severe headache was relatively
small, yielding less reliable and precise estimates
than those of the migraine subset. However, we did
not merely rely on tests of statistical significance but
compared the actual estimates of the hazard ratios.
These comparisons showed plainly the asymmetry in
the severe headache–major depression relationship,
in contrast with the symmetry in the migraine–
major depression relationship. Third, the results on
the association between nonmigraine headache and
major depression are representative only of a small
fraction of the nonmigraine headache distribution—
that is, its severe tail end. The absence of a represen-
tative subset of most nonmigraine headaches—that
is, those that are less severe and less impairing—
limits our ability to test whether our findings on the
comorbidity with major depression characterizes the
entire nonmigraine headache category or is confined
to the severe tail end.
Important strengths also deserve mention. The
sample is representative of the general population
and thus is less prone to the bias that characterizes
studies of clinical samples. The grave limitations im-
posed by the bias in clinical samples for the under-
standing of psychiatric (and other) comorbidity
associated with headache has been emphasized.
33
Also, the few general population studies that have
focused on psychiatric comorbidity in migraine were
restricted to young adults. This study includes a
312 NEUROLOGY 54 January (2 of 2) 2000 at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
broad age range, up to 55 years. We found no modi-
fying effects of age on the migraine–major depression
association, suggesting that the association applies
to a broad age range.
References
1. Merikangas KR, Risch NJ, Merikangas JR, Weissman MM,
Kidd KK. Migraine and depression: association and familial
transmission. J Psychiatr Res 1988;22:119–129.
2. Merikangas KR, Angst J, Isler H. Migraine and psychopathol-
ogy: results of the Zurich Cohort Study of young adults. Arch
Gen Psychiatry 1990;47:849–853.
3. Breslau N, Davis GC, Andreski P. Migraine, psychiatric disor-
ders and suicide attempts: an epidemiologic study in young
adults. Psychiatr Res 1991;37:11–23.
4. Breslau N, Davis GC. Migraine, physical health and psychiat-
ric disorder: a prospective epidemiologic study of young
adults. J Psychiatr Res 1993;27:211–221.
5. Breslau N, Davis GC, Schultz LR, Peterson EL. Migraine and
major depression: a longitudinal study. Headache 1994;34:
387–393.
6. Merikangas KK, Merikangas JR, Angst J. Headache syn-
dromes and psychiatric disorders: association and familial
transmission. J Psychiatr Res 1993;27:197–210.
7. Merikangas KR, Stevens DE, Angst J. Psychopathology and
headache syndromes in the community. Headache 1994;34:
S17–S26.
8. Breslau N, Merikangas K, Bowden CL. Comorbidity of mi-
graine and major affective disorders. Neurology 1994;44(suppl
7):S17–S22.
9. Von Korff M, Le Resche L, Dworkin SF. First onset of common
pain symptoms: a prospective study of depression as a risk
factor. Pain 1993;55:251–258.
10. Dworkin SF, Von Korff M, Le Resche L. Multiple pains and
psychiatric disturbance: an epidemiologic investigation. Arch
Gen Psychiatry 1990;47:239–244.
11. Fields H. Depression and pain: a neurobiological model. Neu-
ropsychiatry, Neuropsychol, Behav Neurol 1991;4:83–92.
12. Katon W, Kleinman A, Rosen G. Depression and somatization:
a review. Part I. Am J Med 1982;72:127–135.
13. Katon W, Kleinman A, Rosen G. Depression and somatization:
a review. Part II. Am J Med 1982;72:241–247.
14. Romano JM, Turner JA. Chronic pain and depression: does
the evidence support a relationship? Psychol Bull 1985;97:18
34.
15. Von Korff M, Simon G. The relationship between pain and
depression. Br J Psychiatry 1996;30(suppl):101–108.
16. Ormel J, Von Korff M, Van den Brink W, Katon W, Brilman
E, Oldehinkel T. Depression, anxiety, and social disability
show synchrony of change in primary care patients. Am J Pub
Health 1993;83:385–390.
17. Potthoff RF. Telephone sampling in epidemiologic research: to
reap the benefits, avoid the pitfalls. Am J Epidemiol 1994;139:
967–978.
18. US Bureau of the Census. Census of Population and Housing,
1990 (United States): public use microdata sample: 1% sam-
ple. Washington, DC: Author, 1990.
19. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Celentano DD, Reed ML. Prevalence
of migraine headache in the United States: relation to age,
income, race, and other sociodemographic factors. JAMA
1992;267:64–69.
20. Headache Classification Committee of the International
Headache Society. Classification and diagnostic criteria for
headache disorders, cranial neuralgias and facial pains. Ceph-
alalgia 1988;8(suppl 7):1–96.
21. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Liberman J. Variation in migraine
prevalence by race. Neurology 1996;47:52–59.
22. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Simon D, Von Korff M, Liberman J.
Reliability of an illness severity measure for headache in a
population sample of migraine sufferers. Cephalalgia 1998;18:
44–51.
23. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Simon D, Liberman J, Von Korff M.
Validity of an illness severity measure for headache in a pop-
ulation sample of migraine sufferers. Pain 1999;79:291–301.
24. World Health Organization. Composite International Diag-
nostic Interview (CIDI), version 2.1. Geneva: World Health
Organization, 1997.
25. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC: Ameri-
can Psychiatric Association, 1994.
26. Wittchen H-U. Reliability and validity studies of the WHO-
Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI): a criti-
cal review. J Psychiatr Res 1994;28:57–84.
27. Cox DR. Regression models and life tables. Series B. J R Stat
Soc 1972;34:187–220.
28. Cox DR. Partial likelihood. Biometrika 1975;62:269 –276.
29. Breslow N. Covariance analysis of censored survival data.
Biometrics 1974;30:89–99.
30. Allison PD. Survival analysis using SAS system: a practical
guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 1995.
31. SAS Institute. SAS/STAT software: The PHREG procedure,
version 6.217. SAS technical report P-217. Cary, NC: SAS
Institute, 1991.
32. Haythornthwaite JA. Migraine headaches and psychopathol-
ogy: future directions. J Psychiatr Res 1993;27:183–186.
33. Lipton RB, Stewart WF. Migraine headaches: epidemiology
and comorbidity. Clin Neurosci 1998;5:2–9.
January (2 of 2) 2000 NEUROLOGY 54 313
at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
2000;54;308- Neurology
N. Breslau, L. R. Schultz, W. F. Stewart, R. B. Lipton, V. C. Lucia and K. M. A. Welch
Headache and major depression: Is the association specific to migraine?
This information is current as of June 5, 2006
& Services
Updated Information http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/full/54/2/308
including high-resolution figures, can be found at:
Permissions & Licensing
http://www.neurology.org/misc/Permissions.shtml
or in its entirety can be found online at:
Information about reproducing this article in parts (figures, tables)
Reprints http://www.neurology.org/misc/reprints.shtml
Information about ordering reprints can be found online:
at ALBERT EINSTEIN COLL MED on June 5, 2006 www.neurology.orgDownloaded from
... Psychosocial or lifestyle interventions are not consistently applied in the field of physiotherapy to manage migraine [13,16,72]. It seems that including psychological interventions in the management of migraine is often associated with the presence of psychiatric disorders or comorbidities [73][74][75][76]. For instance, a strong bidirectional association has been reported between migraine and major depression [76]. ...
... It seems that including psychological interventions in the management of migraine is often associated with the presence of psychiatric disorders or comorbidities [73][74][75][76]. For instance, a strong bidirectional association has been reported between migraine and major depression [76]. However, it should not be assumed that every individual with migraine has psychiatric comorbidities, and that such comorbidities are an exclusive condition to consider the psychological domain of the BPS [77]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose of Review Patient-centred care (PCC) is deemed essential in the rehabilitation of musculoskeletal pain. Integrating such care within a biopsychosocial framework, enables to address all facets of the individual pain experience, and to manage the individual instead of the condition. This narrative review describes the status quo of PCC physiotherapy management of people with headache within a biopsychosocial model. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus were searched (update 07.05.2024). The search-query comprised terminology relating to “headache”, “patient-centred”, “biopsychosocial”, “physiotherapy”. Additional eligibility criteria were reviews, trials, cohort, case report, case–control studies in English, Dutch, French. Recent Findings Gaps are exposed in patient-centred physiotherapy management of migraine, tension-type headache, and cervicogenic headache. While a biopsychosocial approach is advised to manage migraine and tension-type headache, its use in clinical practice is not reflected by the literature. A biopsychosocial approach is not advised in cervicogenic headache. Psychosocial-lifestyle interventions are mainly delivered by health-care providers other than physiotherapists. Additionally, psychologically-informed practice is barely introduced in physiotherapy headache management. Though, managing the social context within a biopsychosocial framework is advised, the implementation by physiotherapists is unclear. Comparable conclusions apply to PCC. Summary PCC is recommended for the physiotherapy management of primary and secondary headache. Such recommendation remains however theoretical, not reaching clinical implementation. Yet, a shift from the traditional disease-centred model of care towards PCC is ongoing and should be continued in physiotherapy management. With this implementation, clinical and economical studies are needed to evaluate its effectiveness.
... If left untreated, the psychiatric disorder increases the risk of migraine chronification and migraine-related disability, reduces quality of life, and negatively affects treatment outcomes. An observational study indicated that the lifetime depression prevalence in persons with migraine was about three times higher than in persons with no history of migraine (Breslau et al., 2000). A meta-analysis of data obtained from 12 studies on migraine and depression noted that the prevalence estimates of depression in migraineurs is highly variable, ranging from 8.6% to 47.9% (Antonaci et al., 2011). ...
... However, there is no evidence to support the following assumption: improving depression control can control migraines. In addition, there was a significant bidirectional relationship between depression and migraine (Breslau et al., 2000). This association is likely mediated by risk factors sleep traits (Rains and Poceta, 2006;Ødegård et al., 2010). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background An association between depression and migraine has been reported in observational studies; however, conventional observational studies are prone to bias. This study aims to investigate the causal relationship between depression and migraine and to quantify the mediating effects of known risk factors. Methods We applied two-sample Mendelian randomization and utilized single nucleotide polymorphisms as genetic instruments for exposure (depression) and mediators (sleep traits). We utilized summary data on genome-wide association studies for depression, sleep-related traits mediators and migraine. For depression, genome-wide association studies (depression) were utilized as a test cohort for the primary analysis. Moreover, genome-wide association studies (major depressive disorder) were utilized to test the stability of the results for the validation cohort. IVW and MR-Egger regression were applied to test the heterogeneity, and Cochran’s Q statistics were calculated to quantitatively evaluate the heterogeneity. MR-PRESSO analyses were utilized to examine and correct possible horizontal pleiotropy through removing outliers, and leave-one-out analyses were utilized to identify outlier SNPs. Results Genetically predicted depression was associated with migraine (OR = 1.321, 95% CI: 1.184–1.473, p < 0.001). Furthermore, risk factors insomnia was associated with migraine risk (OR = 1.766, 95% CI: 1.120–2.784, p = 0.014). The mediator insomnia accounted for 19.5% of the total effect of depression on migraine. Conclusion These results support a potential causal effect of depression on migraine, partly mediated by insomnia. Therefore, the enhancement of sleep quality and difficulty in falling asleep may reduce the migraine burden occasioned by depression.
... Therefore, the socioeconomic burden of migraine is an important nexus that warrants investigation. In Germany, for example, a recent analysis comprising >15 million migraine patients revealed that the annual socioeconomic losses for migraine are estimated to be EUR 100.4 billion [8] According to the literature, migraine headaches and depression are highly associated [11,12]. This can be attributed to genetic factors, environmental factors, and stress, which activate catecholamines such as serotonin and norepinephrine. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Migraine is characterized by sudden acute episodes of pain, with a global prevalence of 18% among all age groups. It is the second leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Prophylactic treatment is important in managing migraine; however, its efficacy and safety are debated. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of desvenlafaxine in female patients with migraine. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational case study involving 10 women diagnosed with migraine who were treated with desvenlafaxine. We measured the number of migraine days per month, average headache duration in minutes, headache severity using a visual analog scale, use of acute medications, and frequency of acute medication use per week. Results: Desvenlafaxine significantly reduced the number of migraine days from 14.70 ± 3.68 at baseline to 2.50 ± 2.50 at follow-up (p < 0.05). The average headache duration dropped from 131.25 ± 32.81 min to 52.50 ± 44.64 min. Headache severity scores improved from 6.80 ± 1.49 at baseline to 0.80 ± 0.92 at follow up, the frequency of acute medication use per week reduced from 3.30 ± 1.49 at baseline to 0.80 ± 0.92, and the frequency of acute medication use decreased from 3.30 ± 1.49 times per week to 0.80 ± 0.92. Conclusions: Desvenlafaxine shows potential as an effective prophylactic therapy for migraine. Larger-scale studies are necessary to further explore its benefits.
... Therefore, pain management in CM-I patients is crucial as it may largely determine the perceived quality of life. On the other hand, the present study also supports the well-established comorbidity between chronic pain and affective symptoms (30), which may affect the perception of pain itself. Depressive disorders are common among patients with chronic pain, resulting in a substantial disease burden and a barrier to effective pain relief (31), which can also amplify the experience and perception of pain (32,33). ...
Article
Chiari Malformation type I (CM-I) is a neurological disorder characterized by cerebellar tonsillar herniation. Chronic pain, particularly headaches, is a prevalent symptom in CM-I patients, significantly impacting their quality of life. The objective of this study was to evaluate the perceived quality of life in adults with CM-I and examine the influence of chronic pain and comorbid symptoms on their well-being. 26 CM-I patients (8 with decompressive surgery) and 26 matched healthy controls were recruited. Participants completed the following questionnaires: WHOQOL-BREF, HDI, NDI, OLBPDQ and HADS. CM-I patients exhibited significantly lower scores across all domains of quality of life when compared to healthy controls. Chronic pain, including headache, neck pain, and low back pain, was more pronounced among CM-I patients and demonstrated a significant correlation with depressive symptoms. Notably, after controlling for chronic pain, the differences in quality of life between CM-I patients and controls diminished. The results suggest that chronic pain, especially headaches, and comorbid depressive symptoms exert a substantial impact on the quality of life of CM-I patients. Surgical intervention alone may not fully address these issues, highlighting the importance of considering psychological interventions as part of the comprehensive treatment. Further research with larger samples and pre-post-surgery assessments is needed to validate these findings and explore the potential benefits of psychological therapies in enhancing the quality of life for CM-I patients.
... Third, there is a need for research that considers psychiatric comorbidities in the study of headache and the environment. Primary headache disorders are highly comorbid with psychiatric disorders, including depression, anxiety, and stress disorders, including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) [107][108][109][110][111][112], and similarly, psychiatric distress has been previously linked to environmental exposures, including the intensification of oil and gas extraction [113][114][115], natural disasters [116,117], and air pollution [118,119]. Although some recent studies have considered the association of headache with psychiatric comorbidities, including insomnia and PTSD, among individuals exposed to natural disasters [120][121][122], no recent studies have examined the joint implications of environmental exposures and psychiatric diseases for headache risk. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose of Review In this narrative review, we summarize the peer-reviewed literature published between 2017 and 2022 that evaluated ambient environmental risk factors for primary headache disorders, which affect more than half of the population globally. Primary headache disorders include migraine, tension-type headache (TTH), and trigeminal and autonomic cephalalgias (TAC). Recent findings We identified 17 articles that met the inclusion criteria via PubMed or Google Scholar. Seven studies (41%) relied on data from US populations. The remaining studies were conducted in China, Taiwan, Germany, Ghana, Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea, and Turkey. Air pollution was the most frequently assessed environmental risk factor. Most studies were cross-sectional and focused on all-cause or migraine headaches; one study included TTH, and none included TAC. Short-term exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) was not consistently associated with headache endpoints, but long-term exposure to PM2.5 was associated with migraine headache prevalence and severity across multiple studies. Elevated ambient temperature, changes in weather, oil and gas well exposure, and less natural greenspace, but not noise pollution, were also associated with headache. No studies considered water pollution, metal exposure, ultrafine particulate matter, or wildfire smoke exposure. Summary There is a need for ongoing research focused on headache and the environment. Study designs with the greatest explanatory power may include longitudinal studies that capture the episodic nature of headache and case-crossover analysis, which control for time-invariant individual-level confounders by design. There is also a clear need for research that considers comorbid psychiatric illness and socioeconomic position as powerful modifiers of the effect of the environment on headache.
... The role of DS in migraine is of particular importance. The association between depression and migraine is well-established both clinically [35][36][37][38] and genetically [39,40]. At molecular level, we have increasing evidence about the link between CGRP and depression. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Migraine is a complex neurological disorder with significant heterogeneity in its clinical presentation and molecular mechanisms. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has emerged as a key player in migraine pathophysiology, but challenges remain in its utilization as a biomarker. This study aimed to investigate salivary CGRP levels during migraine attacks across the frequency spectrum and explore associations with clinical variables. Methods A prospective longitudinal pilot study was conducted, recruiting migraine patients from an outpatient headache clinic. Salivary CGRP levels were measured at interictal, onset, post-2 h of onset and end-of-attack. Using generalized linear mixed models, we explored the effect of CGRP changes over the attack in presence of depressive symptoms (DS), acute attack treatment, and after three-months of erenumab treatment. Finally, patients were classified and compared according to their CGRP phenotype. Results A total of 44 migraine patients were included (90.9% women), with 80 migraine attacks analyzed. Salivary CGRP levels increased at the onset of migraine attacks. We observed statistically significant interactions between DS and both the linear (Est. [SE]: 19.4 [5.8], p = 0.001) and quadratic terms of time (-19.1 [6.0], p = 0.002). Additionally, a significant three-way interaction within the use of acute treated attack (linear-term: -18.5 [6.2], p = 0.005; quadratic-term: 19.2 [6.8], p = 0.005) was also found. Molecular phenotyping revealed that 72.7% (32/44) of patients presented only CGRP-dependent attacks, while 27.3% (12/44) presented non-CGRP-dependent migraine attacks. Patients with only CGRP-dependent attacks were associated with younger age, shorter disease evolution time, a higher proportion of aura, and fewer monthly headache days (p < 0.05). Exploratory analysis of erenumab treatment effects did not result in changes in CGRP levels during migraine attacks. Conclusions Our study underscores the dynamic nature of migraine at a molecular level and emphasizes the importance of integrating clinical variables, such as depressive symptoms, in understanding its pathophysiology. The identification of distinct migraine subtypes based on CGRP dependence suggests potential opportunities for personalized treatment approaches.
... Our finding largely agrees with the findings on the role of omega-3 PUFAs in neuropsychiatric disorders (Lin et al., 2012;Sadeghi et al., 2015). Psychiatric disorders such as depression or anxiety disorders may be either a comorbidity, a trigger, a risk factor for the nonresponse for migraine to treatment and may exhibit a bidirectional relationship with migraine (Antonaci et al., 2011;Baskin and Smitherman, 2009;Breslau et al., 1991;Breslau et al., 2000;Minen et al., 2016;Radat and Swendsen, 2005). Neuroinflammatory pathways may be promising treatment targets and biomarkers of migraine (Kursun et al., 2021). ...
Article
Full-text available
Migraine is a highly prevalent neurological disorder. Among the risk factors identified, psychiatric comorbidities, such as depression, seem to play an important role in its onset and clinical course. Patients with migraine are 2.5 times more likely to develop a depressive disorder; this risk becomes even higher in patients suffering from chronic migraine or migraine with aura. This relationship is bidirectional, since depression also predicts an earlier/worse onset of migraine, increasing the risk of migraine chronicity and, consequently, requiring a higher healthcare expenditure compared to migraine alone. All these data suggest that migraine and depression may share overlapping biological mechanisms. Herein, this review explores this topic in further detail: firstly, by introducing the common epidemiological and risk factors for this comorbidity; secondly, by focusing on providing the cumulative evidence of common biological aspects, with a particular emphasis on the serotoninergic system, neuropeptides such as calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP), pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP), substance P, neuropeptide Y and orexins, sexual hormones, and the immune system; lastly, by remarking on the future challenges required to elucidate the etiopathological mechanisms of migraine and depression and providing updated information regarding new key targets for the pharmacological treatment of these clinical entities.
Article
Full-text available
Reviews evidence linking pain and depression. This evidence suggests that in the presence of more depressive symptoms painful conditions or stimuli are experienced as more severe. Recent ideas from pain research have shown that pain has 3 components: sensory, affective, and evaluative. Pain transmission can be altered by the behavioral state of the person through the action of a pain-modulating system. A model is presented whereby factors controlling the patient's affect and cognition alter that patient's behavioral state, which in turn alters pain transmission through central nervous system (CNS) modulatory networks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
A definition is given of partial likelihood generalizing the ideas of conditional and marginal likelihood. Applications include life tables and inference in stochastic processes. It is shown that the usual large-sample properties of maximum likelihood estimates and tests apply when partial likelihood is used.
Article
• We assessed multiple pain conditions and their association with affective disturbance, somatization, and psychological distress based on questionnaire data from a probability sample of 1016 enrollees of a large health maintenance organization. Respondents were asked about the presence of five pain conditions and were classified empirically in terms of dysfunctional chronic pain status based on pain severity, pain persistence, and painrelated disability days. Logistic regression analyses revealed a highly significant association between number of pain conditions reported and elevated levels of somatization as measured by the Symptom Checklist 90—Revised. Individuals with two or more pain conditions were at elevated risk of an algorithm diagnosis of major depression, while persons with a single pain condition did not differ from persons with no current pain conditions. Number of pain conditions reported was a better predictor of major depression than were important measures of pain experience, including pain severity and pain persistence.
Article
• We present data regarding the association of psychiatric syndromes and migraine headache from a prospective epidemiologic cohort study of 27- and 28-year-olds in Zurich, Switzerland. The prevalence of migraine of 13.3% approximates estimates from previous epidemiologic studies in other regions of the world. Consistent with previous reports, there was a strong association between migraine and depression. However, this is the first study to demonstrate this association in an unselected epidemiologic sample with standardized assessment of psychiatric diagnoses by direct interview. The association between migraine and the anxiety disorders was even stronger than that for the affective disorders. The combination of anxiety disorder and major depression, but not pure anxiety disorders, nor pure depression, were significantly associated with migraine. Our data suggest that migraine with anxiety and depression may constitute a distinct syndrome comprising anxiety, often manifested in early childhood, followed by the occurrence of migraine headaches, and then by discrete episodes of depressive disorder in adulthood. Because of the prospective longitudinal design of this study, future assessments of this cohort will provide further information on the stability of these findings and the course of this cohort as subjects proceed through adulthood.
Article
Objective. —To describe the magnitude and distribution of the public health problem posed by migraine in the United States by examining migraine prevalence, attack frequency, and attack-related disability by gender, age, race, household income, geographic region, and urban vs rural residence.Design. —In 1989, a self-administered questionnaire was sent to a sample of 15000 households. A designated member of each household initially responded to the questionnaire. Each household member with severe headache was asked to respond to detailed questions about symptoms, frequency, and severity of headaches.Setting. —A sample of households selected from a panel to be representative of the US population in terms of age, gender, household size, and geographic area.Participants. —After a single mailing, 20468 subjects (63.4% response rate) between 12 and 80 years of age responded to the survey. Respondents and non-respondents did not differ by gender, household income, region of the country, or urban vs rural status. Whites and the elderly were more likely to respond. Migraine headache cases were identified on the basis of reported symptoms using established diagnostic criteria.Results. —17.6% of females and 5.7% of males were found to have one or more migraine headaches per year. The prevalence of migraine varied considerably by age and was highest in both men and women between the ages of 35 to 45 years. Migraine prevalence was strongly associated with household income; prevalence in the lowest income group (<$10 000) was more than 60% higher than in the two highest income groups (≥$30 000). The proportion of migraine sufferers who experienced moderate to severe disability was not related to gender, age, income, urban vs rural residence, or region of the country. In contrast, the frequency of headaches was lower in higher-income groups. Attack frequency was inversely related to disability.Conclusions. —A projection to the US population suggests that 8.7 million females and 2.6 million males suffer from migraine headache with moderate to severe disability. Of these, 3.4 million females and 1.1 million males experience one or more attacks per month. Females between ages 30 to 49 years from lower-income households are at especially high risk of having migraines and are more likely than other groups to use emergency care services for their acute condition.(JAMA. 1992;267:64-69)
Article
The analysis of censored failure times is considered. It is assumed that on each individual are available values of one or more explanatory variables. The hazard function (age‐specific failure rate) is taken to be a function of the explanatory variables and unknown regression coefficients multiplied by an arbitrary and unknown function of time. A conditional likelihood is obtained, leading to inferences about the unknown regression coefficients. Some generalizations are outlined.