↓ Skip to main content

Physiopathology of Migraine: What Have We Learned from Functional Imaging?

Overview of attention for article published in Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Physiopathology of Migraine: What Have We Learned from Functional Imaging?
Published in
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11910-017-0803-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Russo, Marcello Silvestro, Gioacchino Tedeschi, Alessandro Tessitore

Abstract

This review aims to provide an overview of the most recent and significant functional neuroimaging studies which have clarified the complex mechanisms underlying migraine pathophysiology. The recent data allow us to overcome the concept of a migraine generator suggesting that functional networks abnormalities may lead to changes in different brain area activities and consequent reduced migraine thresholds susceptibility, likely associated with higher migraine severity and burden. Although functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have allowed recognition of several migraine mechanisms, its pathophysiology is not completely understood and is still a matter of research. Nevertheless, in recent years, functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have allowed us to implement our knowledge of migraine pathophysiology. The pivotal role of both the brainstem and the hippocampus in the first phase of a migraine attack, the involvement of limbic pathway in the constitution of a migrainous pain network, the disrupted functional connectivity in cognitive brain networks, as well as the abnormal function of the visual network in patients with migraine with aura are the main milestones in migraine imaging achieved through functional imaging advances. We believe that further studies based on combined functional and structural techniques and the investigation of the different phases of migraine cycle may represent an efficient methodological approach for comprehensively looking into the migrainous brain secrets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 35 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 19 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 39 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,966,095
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#664
of 920 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,840
of 327,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 920 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.