- The PCORI Strategic Plan
- Clinical Effectiveness and Decision Science
- Dissemination and Implementation
- Evaluation and Analysis
- Healthcare Delivery and Disparities Research
- Research Infrastructure
- Our Vision & Mission
- Financial Statements and Reports
- The PCORI Strategic Plan
- Board of Governors
- Methodology Committee
- Engagement, Dissemination, and Implementation Committee
- Research Transformation Committee
- Science Oversight Committee
- Executive Committee
- Finance and Administration Committee
- Governance Committee
- Selection Committee
- Authorizing Law
Evaluating Our Work
- PCORI's Goals (2013)
- Planning Our Organizational Learning, Reporting Our Results
- Evaluating Key Aspects of Our Work
- PCORI Evaluation Group (PEG)
- Executive Team
- Office of the Executive Director
- Program Support and Information Management
- Staff Conflict of Interest Disclosures
- PCORI's Advisory Panels
- Procurement Opportunities
Past Opportunities to Provide Input
- PCORI's Proposed Research Agenda (2021-2022)
- Proposed National Priorities for Health (2021)
- Proposed Principles for the Consideration of the Full Range of Outcomes Data in PCORI-Funded Research (2020)
- Proposed New PCORI Methodology Standards (2018)
- Data Access and Data Sharing Policy: Public Comment (2017)
- Proposed New PCORI Methodology Standards (2017)
Comment on the Proposed New and Revised PCORI Methodology Standards (2016)
- 1. Standards for Formulating Research Questions
- 10: Standards for Studies of Diagnostic Tests
- 12. Standards on Research Designs Using Clusters
- 13: General Comments on the Proposed Revisions to the PCORI Methodology Standards
- 2: Standards Associated with Patient-Centeredness
- 3: Standards for Data Integrity and Rigorous Analysis
- 4: Standards for Preventing and Handling Missing Data
- 5: Standards for Heterogeneity of Treatment Effects
- 6: Standards for Data Registries
- 7: Standards for Data Networks as Research-Facilitating Structures
- 8. Standards for Causal Inference Methods
- 9. Standards for Adaptive Trial Designs
- Peer-Review Process Comments (2014)
- Draft Methodology Report Public Comment Period (2012)
- Past Opportunities to Provide Input
Migraine headache is a disabling condition that affects one in six Americans. Making sense of research results for the many treatments available for migraine is complicated.
To help patients and healthcare professionals understand study results and make the most informed treatment decisions, PCORI has funded the development of an interactive evidence visualization that presents findings from research on drugs and devices for the prevention of migraine. This evidence map and visualization and corresponding report summarize the findings of a systematic rapid review representing a total of 203 randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
This project assessed the benefits and harms of established and newer migraine prevention therapies to inform decisions and identify important gaps in the evidence. The objectives were to:
- Document and index the volume of RCTs (inactive controls and comparative clinical effectiveness studies) that assessed pharmacologic and device therapies for prevention of episodic and chronic migraine
- Visually display the benefits and harms (from RCTs) of newer therapies for migraine prevention in patients who experience episodic or chronic migraine and benchmark these findings to established therapies recognized by clinical practice guidelines
Across three interactive visualizations, users can drill down using features like filters and tool tips to gain more information about therapies or trials of interest, such as the quality of the evidence or the number of participants randomized to a specific therapy.
About Migraine Prevention
Although many available therapies for migraine prevention exist that show some evidence of benefit, for clinicians and patients looking to select a therapy the plethora of options can make decision making a challenge. Many first-line medications used to prevent episodic migraine (fewer than 15 migraine days per month) and chronic migraine (15 or more migraine days per month) were initially developed to treat other health conditions, such as depression or high blood pressure, and carry risks of side effects that may not be tolerable for migraine patients.
What the Evidence Shows
Overall, evidence on the benefits and harms of therapies for reducing migraine in patients living with episodic migraine) or chronic migraine is frequently sparse and often based on few and very low-quality, short trials (less than 12 weeks).
Episodic migraine: High-quality evidence supported two treatments (galcanezumab and erenumab) for episodic migraine at all time points evaluated including six months, although the magnitude of improvement could be considered relatively modest (1.85 fewer migraine days per month or less).
In comparison, efficacy for topiramate, propranolol, and amitriptyline (drugs widely used for migraine prevention) ranged from 0.7 to 0.9 fewer migraine days per month when compared to placebo, and adverse effects were common in patients.
Chronic migraine: Three calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists (eptinezumab, erenumab, and galcanezumab) offered reductions of around 2.6 migraine days per month, with the quality of evidence rated as high.
Future comparative studies comparing established therapies to the newer therapy options are needed to support policy and treatment decisions.
Conclusions and Implications
Interactive evidence visualizations are a new and exciting way to summarize evidence synthesis findings. These tools take complex information and distill it down so that the data is displayed in a visualization that is easy to understand and navigate across diverse user groups. Evidence visualizations may be of interest to researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and even patients, and allow these users to efficiently locate information of interest, like the benefits or harms of a specific therapy, quality of the evidence, or research gaps.
Interactive evidence visualizations are tailored to their respective research questions or topics, are designed to meet the needs of many audiences, and offer the means to quickly gather information for decision making. We look forward to the continued development of these evidence synthesis products to provide stakeholders with meaningful, interactive visualizations supporting evidence-informed decisions.
October 28, 2021, 7:45 AM
Comment by ProCTH,
Awesome content!! I found this article to be very helpful and informative. Especially for me cause I was looking for this information for a long time and it seems that this article has served my purpose, Thanks once again. Keep sharing awesome content like these!!
October 28, 2021, 6:44 AM
Comment by ProRelix Resea…,
Great Content!! I found this article to be very helpful and informative especially because you have described and stressed quite well about the benefit and harms of drug and devices treatment for migraine prevention.
October 7, 2021, 12:33 PM
Comment by Riya,
This blog has helped me a lot in gaining deep drive knowledge in clinical research. Thanks you for sharing
July 9, 2021, 5:17 PM
Comment by PCORI Blog,
Hello, Raveena. Thank you so much for reading the blog and for your interest in clinical research. Have you signed up for our newsletter yet? It's a great way to hear the latest about PCORI. You can sign up here: http:www.pcori.org/subscribe.
July 7, 2021, 2:12 PM
Comment by raveena aher,
Hey thanx for sharing this blog over here. It seems useful to start career in clinical research. We will look forward for more updates.
Add new Comment
What's Happening at PCORI?
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute sends weekly emails about opportunities to apply for funding, newly funded research studies and engagement projects, results of our funded research, webinars, and other new information posted on our site.