29 research outputs found

    Stress and psychological factors before a migraine attack: A time-based analysis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of this study is to examine the stress and mood changes of Japanese subjects over the 1–3 days before a migraine headache.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study participants were 16 patients with migraines who consented to participate in this study. Each subject kept a headache diary four times a day for two weeks. They evaluated the number of stressful events, daily hassles, domestic and non-domestic stress, anxiety, depressive tendency and irritability by visual analog scales. The days were classified into migraine days, pre-migraine days, buffer days and control days based on the intensity of the headaches and accompanying symptoms, and a comparative study was conducted for each factor on the migraine days, pre-migraine days and control days.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The stressful event value of pre-migraine days showed no significant difference compared to other days. The daily hassle value of pre-migraine days was the highest and was significantly higher than that of buffer days. In non-domestic stress, values on migraine days were significantly higher than on other days, and there was no significant difference between pre-migraine days and buffer days or between pre-migraine days and control days. There was no significant difference in the values of domestic stress between the categories. In non-domestic stress, values on migraine days were significantly higher than other days, and there was no significant difference between pre-migraine days and buffer days or between pre-migraine days and control days.</p> <p>There was little difference in sleep quality on migraine and pre-migraine days, but other psychological factors were higher on migraine days than on pre-migraine days.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Psychosocial stress preceding the onset of migraines by several days was suggested to play an important role in the occurrence of migraines. However, stress 2–3 days before a migraine attack was not so high as it has been reported to be in the United States and Europe. There was no significant difference in the values of psychological factors between pre-migraine days and other days.</p

    Post-Hoc Pattern-Oriented Testing and Tuning of an Existing Large Model:Lessons from the Field Vole

    Get PDF
    Pattern-oriented modeling (POM) is a general strategy for modeling complex systems. In POM, multiple patterns observed at different scales and hierarchical levels are used to optimize model structure, to test and select sub-models of key processes, and for calibration. So far, POM has been used for developing new models and for models of low to moderate complexity. It remains unclear, though, whether the basic idea of POM to utilize multiple patterns, could also be used to test and possibly develop existing and established models of high complexity. Here, we use POM to test, calibrate, and further develop an existing agent-based model of the field vole (Microtus agrestis), which was developed and tested within the ALMaSS framework. This framework is complex because it includes a high-resolution representation of the landscape and its dynamics, of the individual’s behavior, and of the interaction between landscape and individual behavior. Results of fitting to the range of patterns chosen were generally very good, but the procedure required to achieve this was long and complicated. To obtain good correspondence between model and the real world it was often necessary to model the real world environment closely. We therefore conclude that post-hoc POM is a useful and viable way to test a highly complex simulation model, but also warn against the dangers of over-fitting to real world patterns that lack details in their explanatory driving factors. To overcome some of these obstacles we suggest the adoption of open-science and open

    Age structure for males and females based on Myllymaki (1977) and the best fit model simulations, and final fit resulting from the POM exercise (accepted fit).

    No full text
    <p>A) Actual male age structure; C) Best fit model male age structure; E) Accepted fit model male age structure; B) Actual female age structure; D) Best fit model female age structure; F) Accepted fit model female age structure.</p

    Three simplified landscapes used for testing the model’s ability to produce vole population cycling.

    No full text
    <p>To test for the emergence of cycles, predator characteristics were varied in conjunction with these landscape structures.</p

    Literature used to obtain density estimates for comparison to model outputs.

    No full text
    <p>Literature used to obtain density estimates for comparison to model outputs.</p

    Three examples of 50 years of simulation using the parameterized model on three different landscapes (see Fig. 3) A) 1 patch; B) three patches; C) 16 patches.

    No full text
    <p>Three examples of 50 years of simulation using the parameterized model on three different landscapes (see Fig. 3) A) 1 patch; B) three patches; C) 16 patches.</p

    GIS map of the island comprising the Ahtiala study area from which the real world data was obtained to test model vole sex ratios and population age-structure.

    No full text
    <p>GIS map of the island comprising the Ahtiala study area from which the real world data was obtained to test model vole sex ratios and population age-structure.</p

    Graphs of sensitivity analysis for the 15 parameters tested.

    No full text
    <p>Fits to density, sex ratios and age structure are shown as proportion deviation from target pattern. X-axis denotes the parameter values used in each case, and the vertical line the actual parameter value chosen following POM testing (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0045872#pone-0045872-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>). Overall measure of fit (black line) is the mean deviance and is capped at 1.0. All graphs are scaled to ±1.0 for proportion deviance from real world patterns (left y-axis), and 0–1.0 for measure of fit (zero being perfect fit) (right y-axis).</p
    corecore