Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Neurol.

Sec. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology

Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1643260

Interoception and Dissociation in Migraine: A Case-Control Study of Chronic and Episodic Subtypes

Provisionally accepted
Akihiro  KorekiAkihiro Koreki1Vilomi  BhatiaVilomi Bhatia1Niranjanan  NirmalananthanNiranjanan Nirmalananthan2Anne-Marie  LoganAnne-Marie Logan2Usman  KhanUsman Khan2Mitsumoto  OnayaMitsumoto Onaya3Sarah  GarfinkelSarah Garfinkel1Hugo  CritchleyHugo Critchley4Mark  EdwardsMark Edwards5Mahinda  YogarajahMahinda Yogarajah1*
  • 1University College London, London, United Kingdom
  • 2St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom
  • 3Shimofusa Seishin Iryo Center, Chiba, Japan
  • 4University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
  • 5King's College London, London, United Kingdom

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Background: Migraine is one of the most common neurological disorders. Despite advances in understanding of episodic migraine, little is understood about the mechanisms underlying the chronification of migraine. Recently, increasing attention has been given to the potential roles of interoceptive abnormalities and dissociation. Therefore, we sought to explore differences in interoception and dissociation in individuals with episodic and chronic migraine versus individuals without migraine. Methods: A total of 49 participants were analysed of which 26 had migraine (15 chronic and 11 episodic) and 23 were control subjects without a headache disorder. Their objective interoceptive accuracy was assessed using the heartbeat counting and discrimination tasks. Interoceptive sensibility was assessed using the Porges body perception questionnaire. Interoceptive trait prediction error (ITPE) was calculated based on the discrepancy between their task performance and sensibility. Interoceptive state prediction error (ISPE) was calculated based on the trial-by-trial correspondence between task performance and confidence. The level of their dissociation was assessed via self-report questionnaires. Results: Patients with migraine had lower interoceptive accuracy for the tracking task (median (interquartile range) 0.50 (0.43) in migraine vs 0.78 (0.26) in control, Mann-Whitney U test, effect size r = 0.35, p = 0.014), higher interoceptive sensibility (110 (52) vs 39 (14), r = 0.74, p < 0.001), and greater ITPE than controls (for the counting task: 1.08 (1.78) vs -1.16 (0.88), r = 0.72, p < 0.001/for the discrimination task: 0.87 (1.44) vs -0.62 (0.97), r = 0.72, p < 0.001). Greater ISPE was also found in patients with chronic migraine than episodic migraine (2.30 (0.35) in chronic vs 1.75 (0.19) in episodic, r = 0.39, p = 0.046). A greater level of somatoform dissociation was found in individuals with chronic, compared to episodic, migraine (27 (11) vs 22 (2), p = 0.029). Conclusion: This is the first study to demonstrate interoceptive abnormalities in migraine, specifically of greater interoceptive prediction errors. Interoceptive abnormalities may represent a transdiagnostic mechanisms relevant to the chronification of migraine, and to frequent co-morbidities such as dissociation.

Keywords: chronic, dissociation, interoception, Migraine, predictive coding

Received: 08 Jun 2025; Accepted: 28 Jul 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Koreki, Bhatia, Nirmalananthan, Logan, Khan, Onaya, Garfinkel, Critchley, Edwards and Yogarajah. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Mahinda Yogarajah, University College London, London, United Kingdom

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.