Abstract
In Woldeamanuel and Oliveira (2022)'s article about the efficacy of exercise in the treatment of migraine, the ranking of the efficacy of strength training (mean difference, - 3.55), aerobic exercise (mean difference, - 2.18 to - 3.13), topiramate (mean difference, - 0.98), and amitriptyline (mean difference, 3.82) using network meta-analysis can mislead readers. First, the inclusion criteria were reported at a monthly frequency of migraine and the end of the intervention, but some article did not meet the inclusion criteria or had data inconsistency. Second, there was an inconsistency in the placebos used in the included studies, which can be problematic in network meta-analysis. Third, all three articles on strength training were rated as high-risk or exhibited some risk of bias. Finally, the effectiveness of this statistical method is questionable for assessing physical activities because strength training, aerobic exercise, and preventive medications can be simultaneously recommended for possible synergistic effects in the prevention of migraine.