Systematic Assessment of the Quality of Research Studies of Conventional and Alternative Treatment(s) of Primary Headache State of the Data at the Mid-Point of the Decade of Pain Control and Research

Background: Diversity of treatments used for headache, and varied quality of research conduct and reporting make it difficult to accurately assess the literature and to determine the best treatment(s) for patients. Objectives: To compare the quality of available research evidence describing the effects and outcomes of conventional, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches to treating primary (migraine, tension, and/or cluster-type) headache. Study Design: A systematic review of quality of research studies of conventional and alternative treatment(s) of primary headache. Methods: Randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of treatment(s) of chronic primary headache (in English between 1979 to June 2004) were searched through MEDLINE, PsycInfo, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the NIH databases. Studies were evaluated using standard approaches for assessing and analyzing quality indicators. Results: 125 studies of conventional, and 121 CAM treatments met inclusion criteria. 80% of studies of conventional treatment(s) reported positive effects (P