Early View

Global prevalence of chronic migraine: a systematic review

JL Natoli

Corresponding Author

JL Natoli

Cerner LifeSciences, Beverly Hills and

Jaime L. Natoli, MPH, Cerner LifeSciences, Beverly Hills, 9100 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 655-E, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, USA. Tel. + 1-310-598-4572, fax + 1-816-936-1972, e-mail [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
A Manack

A Manack

Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, and

Search for more papers by this author
B Dean

B Dean

Cerner LifeSciences, Beverly Hills and

Search for more papers by this author
Q Butler

Q Butler

Cerner LifeSciences, Beverly Hills and

Search for more papers by this author
CC Turkel

CC Turkel

Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, and

Search for more papers by this author
L Stovner

L Stovner

Norwegian National Headache Centre, St Olavs Hospital and

Department of Neuroscience, Norwegian University of Science and Technology Trondheim, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
RB Lipton

RB Lipton

Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA,

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 10 July 2009
Citations: 81

Abstract

The aim of this review was to summarize population-based studies reporting prevalence and/or incidence of chronic migraine (CM) and to explore variation across studies. A systematic literature search was conducted. Relevant data were abstracted and estimates were subdivided based on the criteria used in each study. Sixteen publications representing 12 studies were accepted. None presented data on CM incidence. The prevalence of CM was 0–5.1%, with estimates typically in the range of 1.4–2.2%. Seven studies used Silberstein–Lipton criteria (or equivalent), with prevalence ranging from 0.9% to 5.1%. Three estimates used migraine that occurred ≥ 15 days per month, with prevalence ranging from 0 to 0.7%. Prevalence varied by World Health Organization region and gender. This review identified population-based studies of CM prevalence, although heterogeneity across studies and lack of data from certain regions leaves an incomplete picture. Future studies on CM would benefit from an International Classification of Headache Disorders consensus diagnosis that is clinically appropriate and operational in epidemiological studies.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.