Therapeutic Strategy Evaluation
Randomized, pragmatic, and comparative studies of acute and preventive therapies including CGRP-targeted approaches.
Current Submission Priorities
Call for Papers
Call for Papers
Journal of Migraine Management
Share rigorous migraine research that can influence clinical decisions, policy planning, and patient outcomes worldwide.
45%APC Savings
Global -Research Community
24/7Editorial Support
Call for Papers
Priority Topics in Migraine and Headache Medicine
The journal invites high-impact submissions that improve diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and patient quality of life.
Journal of Migraine Management is currently prioritizing rigorous manuscripts that address unresolved questions in migraine burden, mechanism, and management across diverse populations.
We welcome clinical, translational, and implementation-focused studies that offer practical insight for neurologists, headache specialists, primary care teams, and health systems.
Submissions should provide clear methodology, explicit clinical relevance, and reproducible reporting. Strong manuscripts connect evidence to care pathways, policy, or treatment decision quality.
Biomarkers and Mechanisms
Neurobiological, vascular, and inflammatory pathway studies that clarify migraine heterogeneity and treatment response.
Digital and Behavioral Care
Evidence on tele-neurology, digital diaries, decision support, adherence interventions, and behavioral program effectiveness.
Population and Equity Research
Epidemiology, burden analyses, health disparities, and access studies across sex, age, geography, and socioeconomic groups.
Comorbidity and Complexity
Research on migraine with psychiatric, cardiovascular, sleep, or pain comorbidities requiring integrated management models.
Pediatric and Adolescent Migraine
Developmental perspectives, safety profiles, and age-specific protocol design for younger patient populations.
Quality Expectations
What Strong Submissions Consistently Deliver
Editorial screening favors manuscripts that demonstrate methodological discipline and actionable interpretation.
- Clear clinical or scientific question with justified study design.
- Transparent participant criteria, intervention details, and outcome definitions.
- Appropriate statistical plan with sensitivity or subgroup logic where relevant.
- Balanced discussion of limitations, bias risk, and external validity.
- Complete ethics approval, consent language, and conflict disclosures.
- Accurate references and consistent terminology aligned with neurology standards.
For intervention manuscripts, authors should explicitly describe comparator rationale and treatment setting so readers can evaluate transferability to real-world migraine care.
For observational and registry analyses, prioritize data provenance, case ascertainment quality, and variable definitions to improve reproducibility and meta-analytic utility.
Manuscript Types
Formats Accepted Under This Call
The journal accepts multiple manuscript formats when quality thresholds are met.
Original Research
Prospective or retrospective analyses with robust methodology and clinically interpretable outcomes.
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Evidence syntheses with reproducible search and selection methods, including protocol transparency.
Translational Reports
Bench-to-clinic evidence linking mechanism insight to treatment or monitoring decisions.
Clinical Practice Analyses
Service redesign, care pathway optimization, and implementation studies with measurable effects.
Short Communications
Focused datasets or early findings with clear methodological framing and relevance.
Editorial and Perspective
Expert commentary tied to emerging evidence or strategic shifts in migraine management.
Scope note: Submissions outside migraine and headache medicine may be declined at triage to protect review efficiency.
Submission Pathways
Choose the Route That Fits Your Workflow
Both submission pathways are supported by the same editorial team and review standards.
Manuscriptzone
Recommended for research teams requiring structured metadata fields, revision tracking, and institutional workflow integration.
Simple Submission Form
Useful for rapid initial submission when teams need a lighter interface and quick editorial intake support.
Pre-submission Scope Query
Authors may send scope questions to [email protected] before submission to reduce avoidable triage delays.
After submission, manuscripts receive editorial screening, reviewer assignment, and status updates at defined checkpoints. Decision communication emphasizes clear, actionable revision guidance.
The journal also welcomes special issue proposals when organizers can demonstrate a focused theme, qualified guest leadership, and high-quality contributor pipelines.
High-performing submissions usually define patient population, endpoint hierarchy, and decision relevance in the abstract itself. This improves reviewer assignment quality and gives readers immediate clinical context.
If manuscripts include subgroup analyses, explain prespecification logic and interpretative limits so findings are not overstated. Transparent framing protects scientific trust and improves downstream evidence synthesis utility.
Authors are encouraged to connect findings to care pathways, implementation barriers, or treatment selection decisions. Practical relevance strengthens editorial confidence in potential impact and post-publication use.
Data-rich appendices and protocol links can improve reviewer confidence by clarifying methods that are difficult to summarize in main text. Complete reporting often shortens revision cycles.
Multidisciplinary teams should explicitly state each domain contribution where design combines neurology, psychiatry, imaging, and digital monitoring. Clear structure helps readers evaluate translational significance.
Evidence that addresses underserved populations, access inequities, or adherence constraints is particularly valuable for this call. Operationally useful studies often attract broader clinical attention.
High-performing submissions usually define patient population, endpoint hierarchy, and decision relevance in the abstract itself. This improves reviewer assignment quality and gives readers immediate clinical context.
If manuscripts include subgroup analyses, explain prespecification logic and interpretative limits so findings are not overstated. Transparent framing protects scientific trust and improves downstream evidence synthesis utility.
Authors are encouraged to connect findings to care pathways, implementation barriers, or treatment selection decisions. Practical relevance strengthens editorial confidence in potential impact and post-publication use.
Data-rich appendices and protocol links can improve reviewer confidence by clarifying methods that are difficult to summarize in main text. Complete reporting often shortens revision cycles.
Submit to the Current Call for Papers
Select your preferred submission method and position your work for expert review and global open access visibility.
Editorial support: [email protected]
