BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (Mar 2022)

mBrain: towards the continuous follow-up and headache classification of primary headache disorder patients

  • Mathias De Brouwer,
  • Nicolas Vandenbussche,
  • Bram Steenwinckel,
  • Marija Stojchevska,
  • Jonas Van Der Donckt,
  • Vic Degraeve,
  • Jasper Vaneessen,
  • Filip De Turck,
  • Bruno Volckaert,
  • Paul Boon,
  • Koen Paemeleire,
  • Sofie Van Hoecke,
  • Femke Ongenae

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01813-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 22, no. 1
pp. 1 – 34

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background The diagnosis of headache disorders relies on the correct classification of individual headache attacks. Currently, this is mainly done by clinicians in a clinical setting, which is dependent on subjective self-reported input from patients. Existing classification apps also rely on self-reported information and lack validation. Therefore, the exploratory mBrain study investigates moving to continuous, semi-autonomous and objective follow-up and classification based on both self-reported and objective physiological and contextual data. Methods The data collection set-up of the observational, longitudinal mBrain study involved physiological data from the Empatica E4 wearable, data-driven machine learning (ML) algorithms detecting activity, stress and sleep events from the wearables’ data modalities, and a custom-made application to interact with these events and keep a diary of contextual and headache-specific data. A knowledge-based classification system for individual headache attacks was designed, focusing on migraine, cluster headache (CH) and tension-type headache (TTH) attacks, by using the classification criteria of ICHD-3. To show how headache and physiological data can be linked, a basic knowledge-based system for headache trigger detection is presented. Results In two waves, 14 migraine and 4 CH patients participated (mean duration 22.3 days). 133 headache attacks were registered (98 by migraine, 35 by CH patients). Strictly applying ICHD-3 criteria leads to 8/98 migraine without aura and 0/35 CH classifications. Adapted versions yield 28/98 migraine without aura and 17/35 CH classifications, with 12/18 participants having mostly diagnosis classifications when episodic TTH classifications (57/98 and 32/35) are ignored. Conclusions Strictly applying the ICHD-3 criteria on individual attacks does not yield good classification results. Adapted versions yield better results, with the mostly classified phenotype (migraine without aura vs. CH) matching the diagnosis for 12/18 patients. The absolute number of migraine without aura and CH classifications is, however, rather low. Example cases can be identified where activity and stress events explain patient-reported headache triggers. Continuous improvement of the data collection protocol, ML algorithms, and headache classification criteria (including the investigation of integrating physiological data), will further improve future headache follow-up, classification and trigger detection. Trial registration This trial was retrospectively registered with number NCT04949204 on 24 June 2021 at www.clinicaltrials.gov .

Keywords