This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether the known higher prevalence of migraine in lower household (HH) income groups is explained by a higher incidence rate or a lower remission rate.
Methods: We used data from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study, a US national sample of 132,674 females (with a 64.3% response rate) and 124,665 males (with a 62.0% response rate) 12 years of age and older. Data were previously collected on migraine symptoms, onset age, and demographics. Previously validated methods applied to the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study data were used to simulate a cohort study. Incidence and remission rates were estimated within 3 sex-specific HH income groups (<$22,500, $22,500–$59,999, and ≥$60,000). The χ2 test was used to determine whether the incidence or remission rates differed by HH income group as an explanation for differences in migraine prevalence by HH income.
Results: Migraine prevalence increased as HH income decreased for females (χ2, p < 0.01) and males (χ2, p < 0.01). Differences were not explained by race and other known confounders. Variation in prevalence was explained, in large part, by a higher incidence rate in the lower HH income groups for both females (χ2, p < 0.01) and males (χ2, p < 0.01). Migraine remission rates did not differ by HH income.
Conclusions: The higher incidence of migraine in lower HH income groups is compatible with the social causation hypothesis. Once initiated, migraine remission is independent of HH income. Onset and remission may have etiologically distinct causes.
GLOSSARY
- AMPP=
- American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention;
- HH=
- household;
- MIDAS=
- Migraine Disability Assessment;
- SES=
- socioeconomic status
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
Supplemental data at www.neurology.org
Editorial, page 942
- Received November 13, 2012.
- Accepted in final form May 21, 2013.
- © 2013 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.