Migraine Care Challenges and Strategies in US Uninsured and Underinsured Adults: A Narrative Review, Part 1

Hallmarks of primary headache: part 1 - migraine

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Migraine is a common disabling conditions which, globally, affects 15.2% of the population. It is the second cause of health loss in terms of years lived with disability, the first among women. Despite being so common, it is poorly recognised and too often undertreated. Specialty centres and neurologists with specific expertise on headache disorders have the knowledge to provide specific care: however, those who do not regularly treat patients with migraine will benefit from a synopsis on the most relevant and updated information about this condition. This paper presents a comprehensive view on the hallmarks of migraine, from genetics and diagnostic markers, up to treatments and societal impact, and reports the elements that identify migraine specific features.

MAIN RESULTS

The most relevant hallmark of migraine is that it has common and individual features together. Besides the known clinical manifestations, migraine presentation is heterogeneous with regard to frequency of attacks, presence of aura, response to therapy, associated comorbidities or other symptoms, which likely reflect migraine heterogeneous genetic and molecular basis. The amount of therapies for acute and for prophylactic treatment is really wide, and one of the difficulties is with finding the best treatment for the single patient. In addition to this, patients carry out different daily life activities, and might show lifestyle habits which are not entirely adequate to manage migraine day by day. Education will be more and more important as a strategy of brain health promotion, because this will enable reducing the amount of subjects needing specialty care, thus leaving it to those who require it in reason of refractory condition or presence of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognizing the hallmarks of migraine and the features of single patients enables prescribing specific pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Medical research on headaches today particularly suffers from the syndrome of single-disease approach, but it is important to have a cross-sectional and joint vision with other close specialties, in order to treat our patients with a comprehensive approach that a heterogeneous condition like migraine requires.

The headache research priorities: Research goals from the American Headache Society and an international multistakeholder expert group

OBJECTIVE

To identify and disseminate research priorities for the headache field that should be areas of research focus during the next 10 years.

BACKGROUND

Establishing research priorities helps focus and synergize the work of headache investigators, allowing them to reach the most important research goals more efficiently and completely.

METHODS

The Headache Research Priorities organizing and executive committees and working group chairs led a multistakeholder and international group of experts to develop headache research priorities. The research priorities were developed and reviewed by clinicians, scientists, people with headache, representatives from headache organizations, health-care industry representatives, and the public. Priorities were revised and finalized after receiving feedback from members of the research priorities working groups and after a public comment period.

RESULTS

Twenty-five research priorities across eight categories were identified: human models, animal models, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management, treatment, inequities and disparities, research workforce development, and quality of life. The priorities address research models and methods, development and optimization of outcome measures and endpoints, pain and non-pain symptoms of primary and secondary headaches, investigations into mechanisms underlying headache attacks and chronification of headache disorders, treatment optimization, research workforce recruitment, development, expansion, and support, and inequities and disparities in the headache field. The priorities are focused enough that they help to guide headache research and broad enough that they are widely applicable to multiple headache types and various research methods.

CONCLUSIONS

These research priorities serve as guidance for headache investigators when planning their research studies and as benchmarks by which the headache field can measure its progress over time. These priorities will need updating as research goals are met and new priorities arise.

Association between Migraine and Quality of Life, Mental Health, Sleeping Disorders, and Health Care Utilization Among Older African American Adults

PURPOSE

This study examines the associations between migraine headaches, well-being, and health care use among a sample of underserved older African American adults. Controlling for relevant variables, the association between migraine headaches and (1) health care utilization, (2) health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and (3) physical and mental health outcomes was examined.

METHODS

Our sample included 760 older African American adults from South Los Angeles recruited through convenience and snowball sampling. In addition to demographic variables, our survey included validated instruments, such as the SF-12 QoL, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and the Geriatric Depression Scale. Data analysis included 12 independent multivariate models using multiple linear regression, log transferred linear regression, binary and multinomial logistic regression, and generalized linear regression with Poisson distribution.

RESULTS

Having migraine was associated with three categories of outcomes: (1) higher level of health care utilization measured by (i) emergency department admissions and (ii) number of medication use; (2) lower level of HRQoL and health status measured by (i) lower self-rated health (ii) physical QoL, and (iii) mental QoL; and (3) worse physical and mental health outcomes measured by (i) higher number of depressive symptoms, (ii) higher level of pain, (iii) sleep disorder, and (iv) being disabled.

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine headache significantly was associated with quality of life, health care utilization, and many health outcomes of underserved African American middle-aged and older adults. Diagnoses and treatments of migraine among underserved older African American adults require multi-faceted and culturally sensitive interventional studies.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Headache Care and Research

ABSTRACT

This article reviews the disparities faced by individuals who experience headache disorders and discusses potential solutions to deliver equitable care. Disparities exist in the diagnosis and treatment of headache disorders with regard to race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexual orientation, geography, and socioeconomic status. Furthermore, research in the realm of headache disparities is inadequate, and the clinical trial representation of patients from underserved communities is poor. Many barriers exist to optimizing care for underserved communities and this article addresses these barriers and presents ways to combat them.

Treating the Uninsured and Underinsured with Migraine in the USA

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To define, describe, and identify potential solutions for health disparities in the uninsured and underinsured with migraine in the USA.

RECENT FINDINGS

Uninsured and underinsured patients with migraine experience health disparities in diagnosis and treatment of migraine. Migraine patients have higher healthcare costs and higher employment disability, which contribute to a higher likelihood of uninsured or underinsured status. Uninsured or underinsured status, combined with factors such as race, socioeconomic status, geographic location, and care location, are correlated with delays in or decreased migraine diagnosis and treatment. Migraine prevalence is increased in the uninsured and underinsured. Potential solutions include advocacy for policy changes that improve access to care, increasing awareness and representation of underrepresented groups, providing resources to patients to reduce costs, and active patient engagement in migraine care. Continued efforts from all stakeholders have the potential to reduce health disparities in uninsured and underinsured patients with migraine, reducing disability and improving quality of life.

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

Current definitions of migraine that are based mainly on clinical characteristics do not account for other patient's features such as those related to an impaired quality of life, due to loss of social life and productivity, and the differences related to the geographical distribution of the disease and cultural misconceptions which tend to underestimate migraine as a psychosocial rather than neurobiological disorder.Global differences definition, care access, and health equity for headache disorders, especially migraine are reported in this paper from a collaborative group of the editorial board members of the Journal of Headache and Pain. Other components that affect patients with migraine, in addition to the impact promoted by the migraine symptoms such as stigma and social determinants, are also reported.

Unique Considerations in Episodic Migraine: Underserved Populations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Episodic migraine is a common and disabling neurological disorder that is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Additional barriers are put in place for those who belong to an underserved population. This could be based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been a lot of interest in understanding the extent of these disparities, but studies for many of these groups are lacking. More work is needed to understand the disparities and needs of underserved populations. Most of the literature has been done for Black populations but there are many other underserved communities that need assessment and intervention. The healthcare community needs to take action to improve support for populations with a higher incidence of migraine and disability, yet a lower rate of diagnosis and treatment. Some recommendations include awareness of biases, systemic changes, education, and including diverse populations in research and training.

Migraine in university students: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a complex, neurobiological disorder usually presenting as a unilateral, moderate to severe headache accompanied by sensory disturbances. Migraine prevalence has risen globally, affecting 14% of individuals and 16% of students and carries many negative impacts in both cohorts. With no recent meta-analysis of global migraine prevalence or associated factors in students, this systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020167927). Electronic databases (n = 12) were searched for cross-sectional studies (1988 to August 2021, IHS criteria). Ninety-two articles were meta-analysed and 103 were narratively reviewed. The risk of bias was assessed using an established tool.

RESULTS

The risk of bias ranged from low to moderate. Migraine pooled prevalence (R-Studio) was demonstrated at 19% (95% CI, 16%-22%, p < 0.001, I^2 98%): females 23% (95% CI, 19%-27%, p < 0.001), males 12% (95% CI, 9%-15%, p < 0.001). Gender (p < 0.0001), geographical region (p = 0.01), migraine types (p = 0.0002) and prevalence timeframes (p = 0.02) may be influencing the substantial heterogeneity. Migraine triggers were primarily behavioural and environmental and treatments were predominantly pharmaceutical. Impacts ranged from academic performance impairment to psychological co-morbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers the most comprehensive overview of migraine prevalence and associated factors in university students. Migraine prevalence in university students has increased and has many negative effects. Enhancing migraine recognition and management at university may have positive implications for an improved educational experience, as well as for the burden migraine currently incurs, both in university and beyond.

SIGNIFICANCE

This global systematic review and meta-analysis of 92 studies and narrative review of 103 studies provide the most comprehensive synthesis to date of migraine prevalence and associated factors in university students. Pooled prevalence has increased to 19%. The significant heterogeneity demonstrated is influenced by gender, geographical region, migraine type and prevalence timeframes. Students manage migraines primarily with pharmaceuticals. Further studies conducted in low and middle-income countries, following headache protocols and reporting frequency of treatment-seeking and medication usage are warranted.

Equity and Disparities in Diagnosis, Management, and Research of Post-Traumatic Headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are notable health disparities and inequities in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and concussion by race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, and geography. This review will evaluate these disparities and inequities and assess the social determinants of health that drive outcomes for post-traumatic headache. Interventions for achieving this are also discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Significant disparities and inequities exist in TBI and concussion among people of different races, socioeconomic status, and geographic locations. Migraine is a common symptom post-concussion, for which disparities and social determinants of health are also discussed. Overall, multi-level interventions to reduce these disparities and inequities are reviewed for post-traumatic headache but require further investigation. Interventions are needed to reduce disparities and inequities including public health initiatives, improvements in clinical care, diversity/inclusion training, and research efforts. As literature expands, we can form guidance to identify solutions for eliminating disparities in care of diverse populations.

Global, regional, and national burden of migraine in 204 countries and territories, 1990 to 2019

ABSTRACT

Data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 were used to report the burden of migraine in 204 countries and territories during the period 1990 to 2019, through a systematic analysis of point prevalence, annual incidence, and years lived with disability (YLD). In 2019, the global age-standardised point prevalence and annual incidence rate of migraine were 14,107.3 (95% Uncertainty Interval [UI] 12,270.3-16,239) and 1142.5 (95% UI 995.9-1289.4) per 100,000, an increase of 1.7% (95% UI 0.7%-2.8%) and 2.1% (95% UI 1.1%-2.8%) since 1990, respectively. Moreover, the global age-standardised YLD rate in 2019 was 525.5 (95% UI 78.8-1194), an increase of 1.5% (95% UI -4.4% to 3.3%) since 1990. The global point prevalence of migraine in 2019 was higher in females and increased by age up to the 40 to 44 age group, then decreased with increased age. Belgium (22,400.6 [95% UI: 19,305.2-26,215.8]), Italy (20,337.7 [95% UI: 17,724.7-23,405.8]), and Germany (19,436.4 [95% UI: 16,806.2-22,810.3]) had the 3 highest age-standardised point prevalence rates for migraine in 2019. In conclusion, there were large intercountry differences in the burden of migraine, and this burden increased significantly across the measurement period. These findings suggest that migraine care needs to be included within the health system to increase population awareness regarding the probable risk factors and treatment strategies especially among young adults and middle-aged women, as well as to increase the data on migraines.

Factors Associated With, and Mitigation Strategies for, Health Care Disparities Faced by Patients With Headache Disorders

OBJECTIVE

To review contemporary issues of health care disparities in headache medicine with regard to race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and geography and propose solutions for addressing these disparities.

METHODS

An Internet and PubMed search was performed and literature was reviewed for key concepts underpinning disparities in headache medicine. Content was refined to areas most salient to our goal of informing the provision of equitable care in headache treatment through discussions with a group of 16 experts from a range of headache subspecialties.

RESULTS

Taken together, a multitude of factors, including racism, SES, insurance status, and geographical disparities, contribute to the inequities that exist within the health care system when treating headache disorders. Interventions such as improving public education, advocacy, optimizing telemedicine, engaging in community outreach to educate primary care providers, training providers in cultural sensitivity and competence and implicit bias, addressing health literacy, and developing recruitment strategies to increase representation of underserved groups within headache research are proposed as solutions to ameliorate disparities.

CONCLUSION

Neurologists have a responsibility to provide and deliver equitable care to all. It is important that disparities in the management of headache disorders are identified and addressed.

Race, ethnicity, and other sociodemographic characteristics of patients with hospital admission for migraine in the United States

BACKGROUND

Despite the growing awareness across the general population, migraine is often underdiagnosed and undertreated in socially and economically marginalized groups. The present study aimed to investigate the differential effects of race and income on other sociodemographic data and hospital length of stay in patients admitted to hospital with a primary diagnosis of migraine headache.

METHODS

We utilized the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database to identify patients admitted to the hospital from 2004 to 2017 with primary diagnosis of migraine. Information on demographic and length of stay data was obtained. Only patients older than 18 years were selected and age outliers were excluded. Race groups were identified as "White", "Black", "Asian or Pacific Islander", "Native American", or "Other ethnic group", as originally reported in the NIS database. Income was identified as the estimated median household income of residents in the patient's ZIP Code.

RESULTS

A total of 106,761,737 valid cases were identified. After applying our case inclusion criteria, only 61453 (median age= 42 years, range= 18-78 years) were included. Patients identified as "Black", "Hispanic" or "Native Americans" were more likely to have lower household income (p < 0.001), whereas higher income was found for the patients identified as "White"", even when men and women were considered separately (p < 0.001). No effects of race and/or household income was found on the length of stay in hospital.

IMPLICATIONS

The occurrence of migraine diagnosis on hospital admission in the USA can be impacted by dramatic culturally driven patient-clinician communication differences between ethnic groups.

Barriers to care in episodic and chronic migraine: Results from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess rates of and factors associated with traversing fundamental barriers to good medical outcomes and pharmacologic care in individuals with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), including socioeconomic status and race.

BACKGROUND

Barriers to good outcomes in migraine include the lack of appropriate medical consultation, failure to receive an accurate diagnosis, not being offered a regimen with acute and preventive pharmacologic treatments (if indicated), and not avoiding medication overuse.

METHODS

The Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study was a longitudinal Internet-based survey. Respondents who met criteria for migraine consistent with the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, had a Migraine Disability Assessment score ≥ 6, and provided health insurance coverage status were included in this analysis. Successfully traversing each barrier to care and the effects of sociodemographic characteristics were examined.

RESULTS

Among 16,789 respondents with migraine, 9184 (54.7%; EM: 7930; CM: 1254) were eligible. Current headache consultation was reported by 27.6% (2187/7930) of EM and 40.8% (512/1254) of CM respondents. Among consulters, 75.7% (1655/2187) with EM and 32.8% (168/512) with CM were accurately diagnosed. Among diagnosed consulters, 59.9% (992/1655) with EM and 54.2% (91/168) with CM reported minimally appropriate acute and preventive pharmacologic treatment. Among diagnosed and treated consulters, in the EM group 31.8% (315/992) and in the CM group 74.7% (68/91) met medication overuse criteria. Only 8.5% (677/7930) of EM and 1.8% (23/1254) of CM respondents traversed all four barriers. Higher income was positively associated with likelihood of traversing each barrier. Blacks and/or African Americans had higher rates of consultation than other racial groups. Blacks and/or African Americans and multiracial people had higher rates of acute medication overuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve care should focus on increasing consultation and diagnosis rates, improving the delivery of all appropriate guideline-based treatment, and avoidance of medication overuse.

Headache Disparities in African-Americans in the United States: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this paper is to give a narrative review of the racial/ethnic disparities in African-Americans (AA) found in headache medicine and provide plausible responses to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) issued Request for information (RFI); "Soliciting Input on Areas of Health Disparities and Inequities in Neurological Disease and/or Care in the United States (US)" as it relates to AA and headache medicine.

BACKGROUND

On March 31, 2020 the NINDS issued a RFI "Soliciting Input on Areas of Health Disparities and Inequities in Neurological Disease and/or Care in the US Across the Lifespan", RFI-NOT-NS-20-026, with response date ending June 15, 2020.¹ However as of June 13, 2020, a PubMed search with key terms "African American Headache disparities" yielded few results.

METHODS

Multi-database search and literature review.

RESULTS/DISCUSSION

As of June 13, 2020, a PubMed search with key terms "African American (or Black) Headache disparities" yielded 13 results. Searches of "Migraine Disparities Race" and "Migraine disparities African American" both yielded three results with one non-specific for migraine. In, "Headache disparities race" yielded one result in the PsycINFO database and 23 results in Web of Science database. Key areas of adult headache disparity and/or inequity were health care services for migraine treatment are less utilized, follow-up appointments are terminated more regularly, inaccurate diagnoses are more common, acute migraine attack medications are prescribed less frequently, mistrust and lower quality communication with physicians is reported, mistrust, increased migraine burden, frequency, and severity and risk for progression more associated depression and lower quality of life in AAs compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Literature on race-based disparities is even more scarce in pediatric populations, however it has been shown that white children are significantly more likely to receive neuroimaging than others which may indicate biases in pediatric populations. Potential determinants of these race-based disparities, research strategies and approaches vary and are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Race-based disparities exist in headache medicine in the US. Research is needed. Research strategies and approaches currently with limited use in neurology and headache medicine may be warranted and appropriate to address race-based headache disparities. Funding is paramount.

Equity of African American Men in Headache in the United States: A Perspective From African American Headache Medicine Specialists (Part 1)

Migraine and severe headache affect approximately 1 in 6 U.S. adults and migraine is one of the most disabling disorders worldwide. Approximately 903,000 to 1.5 million African American (AA) men are affected by migraine in the United States. Racial disparities in headache medicine exist. In addition, there are limited headache studies that attest to the inclusion of or have robust data on AA men in headache medicine in the United States. Racial concordance between provider and patient may ameliorate some aspects of care disparities. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that diversity and inclusion particularly in leadership of organizations has consistently produced positive change, increased innovation, and long-term success. Most national headache organizations strive to improve the care and lives of people living with headache disorders yet only ~0.5% of their physician members are AA men. Herein, we provide an observation of equity issues from the perspective of AA men in the headache medicine subspecialty. Part 1 of this manuscript explores inherent and potential challenges of the equity of AA men in headache medicine including headache disparities, mistrust, understudied/lack of representation in research, cultural differences, implicit/explicit bias, and the diversity tax. Part 2 of this work offers possible solutions to achieve equity for AA men in headache including: (1) addressing head and facial pain disparities and mistrust in AA men; (2) professionalism and inclusion; (3) organizational/departmental leadership buy-in for racial diversity; (4) implicit/explicit and other bias training; (5) diversity panels with open discussion; (6) addressing diversity tax; (7) senior mentorship; (8) increased opportunities for noteworthy and important roles; (9) forming and building alliances and partnerships; (10) diversity leadership training programs; (11) headache awareness, education, and literacy with focus to underrepresented in medicine trainees and institutions; and (12) focused and supported the recruitment of AA men into headache medicine. More work is needed for equity of AA men in headache medicine.

What Will it Take to Move the Needle for Headache Disorders? An Advocacy Perspective

Discrimination toward people living with migraine and other headache disorders is widespread and socially accepted. Stigma toward these diseases is both a manifestation of these discriminatory attitudes and a sustainer of them. For those living with migraine and headache disorders, stigma limits the full expression of their lives, as well as the likelihood of receiving health care to reduce the burden. In the past decade, public advocacy organizations have emerged in the United States and internationally to counter the consequences of this stigma. These organizations have raised public awareness of these diseases, corrected misconceptions, and empowered millions of people affected by them. The Alliance for Headache Disorders Advocacy has focused on addressing the structural stigma inherent in discriminatory policies of employers, government agencies, and public institutions. While notable progress has been made, there is considerable work left to be done to increase resources and equity for people living with headache disorders.

Nonpharmacological Self-Management of Migraine Across Social Locations: An Equity-Oriented, Qualitative Analysis

Background

Migraine is a disabling neurological disorder and the sixth biggest cause of disability worldwide. The World Health Organization has declared migraine a major public health problem due to a paucity of knowledge about cause and effective treatment options. Both in incidence and severity, migraine disproportionately affects people occupying marginalized social locations (SL). Managed pharmacologically, migraine is treated with daily preventive and as-needed abortive medications. Both come with high literal and figurative costs: intolerable side effects, medication interactions, and prohibitive prices. Cost prohibitive, ineffective, and unsustainable pharmacological treatment options have contributed to high levels of interest in complementary approaches by people with migraine, but little is known about their motivations, patterns of use or access, or how these may vary by SL.

Method

We conducted focus groups with 30 people with migraine to explore their desires and recommendations for migraine clinicians and researchers. We used qualitative content analysis to identify themes.

Outcomes: We identified 4 themes: a more holistic, collaborative, long-term treatment approach; medication as a short-term solution; high personal and economic costs of medication; and desire for more information and access to natural approaches. Across SL, participants expressed keen interest in integrative approaches and wanted better access to complementary modalities. Participants in marginalized SL described reliance on traditional/folk remedies, including engagement with family and community healers, who they described as more affordable and culturally accessible.

Conclusions

Holistic and integrative approaches were preferred over medication as long-term migraine management strategies. However, people in marginalized SL, while disproportionately disabled by migraine, did not feel as comfortable accessing integrative approaches through currently available channels. Engaging with these communities and using a critical lens to explore barriers to access can develop options to make complementary modalities more approachable, while also attending to systemic blind spots that may unintentionally alienate socially marginalized groups.

A Critical Exploration of Migraine as a Health Disparity: the Imperative of an Equity-Oriented, Intersectional Approach

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite recognition of rising prevalence and significant burden, migraine remains underestimated, underdiagnosed, and undertreated. This is especially true among groups who have been historically, socially, and economically marginalized such as communities of color, women, people experiencing poverty, people with lower levels of education, and people who hold more than one of these marginalized identities. While there is growing public and professional interest in disparities in migraine prevalence, there is a paucity of research focusing on racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities, and the social and structural determinants of health and equity that perpetuate these disparities. From a health equity perspective, migraine research and treatment require an examination not only of biological and behavioral factors, but of these identities and underlying, intersecting social and structural determinants of health.

RECENT FINDINGS

Significant disparities in migraine incidence, prevalence, migraine-related pain and disability, access to care, and quality of care persist among marginalized and underserved groups: African Americans, Hispanics, people experiencing poverty, un- or under-employment, the un- and under-insured, people who have been exposed to stressful and traumatic events across the lifespan, and people experiencing multiple, overlapping marginalized identities. These same groups are largely underrepresented in migraine research, despite bearing disproportionate burden. Current approaches to understanding health disparities in migraine largely assume an essentializing approach, i.e., documenting differences between single identity groups-e.g., race or income or education level-rather than considering the mechanisms of disparities: the social and structural determinants of health. While disparities in migraine are becoming more widely acknowledged, we assert that migraine is more aptly understood as a health equity issue, that is, a condition in which many of the health disparities are avoidable. It is important in research and clinical practice to consider perspectives that incorporate a cultural understanding of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic identity within and across all levels of society. Incorporating perspectives of intersectionality provides a strong foundation for understanding the role of these complex combination of factors on migraine pain and treatment. We urge the adoption of intersectional and systems perspectives in research, clinical practice, and policy to examine (1) interplay of race, gender, and social location as key factors in understanding, diagnosing, and treating migraine, and (2) the complex configurations of social and structural determinants of health that interact to produce health inequities in migraine care. An intentional research and clinical focus on these factors stands to improve how migraine is identified, documented, and treated among marginalized populations.