» Articles » PMID: 37595002

Perception of Typical Migraine Images on the Internet: Comparison Between a Metropolis and a Smaller Rural City in Germany

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2023 Aug 18
PMID 37595002
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The medial portrayal of migraine is often stereotypical and inaccurate but reflects how society perceives migraine. The discrepancy between others' views and the reality of affected individuals may negatively affect access to treatment and the disease course of patients with migraine. This study aimed to investigate whether images presented in the media as typical migraine attacks are perceived as realistic and representative by migraine patients in Rostock, a smaller town in rural Germany, and compare the results to those from Berlin, a large metropolis. We performed an online survey in Rostock. Migraine patients were shown ten images of migraine attacks, which were among the most downloaded stock pictures on the internet under the search term "migraine". They rated on a scale of 0-100 to what extent the pictures were realistic for migraine attacks (realism score), representative of their own migraine (representation score), or the society's view of migraine (society score). In addition, we compared our results with a recently published study from the metropolitan region of Berlin. A total of 174 migraine patients completed our survey. Mean (SD) realism, representation, and society scores were 59.9 (17.5), 56.7 (18.3), and 58.4 (17.1) respectively. Images of older patients were perceived as significantly more realistic and representative than those of younger patients (P < .001). Patients in Rostock (rural region) rated the images as significantly more realistic and representative than survey participants in Berlin (metropolis). Migraine patients in a rural region found typical migraine images only moderately realistic and representative but to a higher degree than their counterparts from a metropolis.

Citing Articles

Unravelling Migraine Stigma: A Comprehensive Review of Its Impact and Strategies for Change.

Casas-Limon J, Quintas S, Lopez-Bravo A, Alpuente A, Andres-Lopez A, Castro-Sanchez M J Clin Med. 2024; 13(17).

PMID: 39274435 PMC: 11396411. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13175222.


Health equity, care access and quality in headache - part 1.

Tana C, Raffaelli B, Portes Souza M, Ruiz de la Torre E, Massi D, Kisani N J Headache Pain. 2024; 25(1):12.

PMID: 38281917 PMC: 10823691. DOI: 10.1186/s10194-024-01712-7.

References
1.
Thiele A, Strauss S, Angermaier A, Klehr L, Bartsch L, Kronenbuerger M . Treatment Realities of Headache Disorders in Rural Germany by the Example of the Region of Western Pomerania. Brain Sci. 2021; 11(7). PMC: 8301947. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11070839. View

2.
Ryvlin P, Skorobogatykh K, Negro A, Sanchez-de la Rosa R, Israel-Willner H, Sundal C . Current clinical practice in disabling and chronic migraine in the primary care setting: results from the European My-LIFE anamnesis survey. BMC Neurol. 2021; 21(1):1. PMC: 7780632. DOI: 10.1186/s12883-020-02014-6. View

3.
Cevoli S, DAmico D, Martelletti P, Valguarnera F, Del Bene E, De Simone R . Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of migraine in Italy: a survey of patients attending for the first time 10 headache centres. Cephalalgia. 2009; 29(12):1285-93. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2009.01874.x. View

4.
Parikh S, Kempner J, Young W . Stigma and Migraine: Developing Effective Interventions. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2021; 25(11):75. PMC: 8647964. DOI: 10.1007/s11916-021-00982-z. View

5.
Ashina M, Terwindt G, Al-Karagholi M, de Boer I, Lee M, Hay D . Migraine: disease characterisation, biomarkers, and precision medicine. Lancet. 2021; 397(10283):1496-1504. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32162-0. View