Back to blog
Guide14 min read

The Complete Guide to Migraine Trigger Tracking: From First Attack to Pattern Discovery

Most migraineurs can name a few suspected triggers but have never confirmed them with data. This is the guide to building a tracking practice that actually reveals what is driving your attacks.

A diagnosis of migraine often comes with a list of generic triggers and a recommendation to keep a headache diary. What it rarely comes with is a guide to what that diary should actually contain, how to make sense of the data you collect, and what to do with patterns once you find them. This guide fills that gap.

Whether you have been managing migraines for decades or were diagnosed recently, systematic tracking is the single highest-leverage intervention you can take on your own. Research shows that accurate trigger identification reduces attack frequency in 60-80% of patients who achieve it. The challenge is that most people never get there — not because their triggers are undiscoverable, but because their tracking approach was incomplete.

Why Tracking Matters

The human brain is a pattern-recognition machine, but it is also susceptible to confirmation bias and memory distortion. If you believe stress triggers your migraines, you will remember every attack that followed a stressful event and forget the stressful weeks that passed without incident. If you believe red wine is a trigger, you may not notice that you always drink wine when you also sleep late and skip your morning routine.

Systematic tracking replaces memory with data. Data does not have confirmation bias. When you have 90 days of consistent logs, you can calculate whether stress actually increases your attack rate — not whether it feels like it does. This distinction is the difference between suspecting your triggers and knowing them.

Studies have found that up to 50% of self-reported migraine triggers are inaccurate when tested objectively. The triggers you are avoiding may not be your actual triggers — and the ones driving your attacks may still be completely unidentified.

What to Track

Tracking everything is not practical. Tracking too little makes pattern detection impossible. Here is the evidence-based minimum list, organized by category:

Attack Data (log every migraine)

Daily Factors (log every single day, including non-attack days)

Environmental Factors (ideally automated)

This list looks long but most of it takes 30-60 seconds per day once you have a routine. Environmental data, if automated, requires no time at all.

The First 30 Days: Getting Started

The first month of tracking is the hardest. You will not see patterns yet, you may question whether it is worth the effort, and you will miss days. That is normal. Here is how to make it through.

Pick a consistent time

Do your daily check-in at the same time every day. Evening is usually best — you have completed the day and can reflect on the full picture. Link it to an existing habit: right before brushing your teeth, right after dinner, immediately when you get into bed. Attach it to something that already happens automatically.

Start with fewer factors

If the full list feels overwhelming, start with five: sleep quality, stress level, hydration, caffeine, and menstrual phase (if applicable). Add more categories after two weeks, once the daily habit is established. Incomplete tracking of many factors is worse than complete tracking of a few.

Do not retroactively fill in data

It is tempting to fill in three days of missed entries from memory. Do not. Memory-sourced data undermines the statistical validity of your entire dataset. A logged gap is honest. A falsely filled gap is corrupted data that will lead you to wrong conclusions. Skip a day, mark it as missing, and continue.

Manual vs Automated Tracking

There are three broad approaches to migraine tracking, each with different tradeoffs:

Paper Diary

The traditional neurologist-recommended approach. Pros: no technology required, can be highly personalized, easy to share with doctors. Cons: data analysis is entirely manual, weather data must be looked up separately, pattern detection requires creating your own spreadsheets, and daily compliance tends to drop significantly after week two. Paper diaries generate data; they do not generate insights.

Basic App Tracking

Apps like Migraine Buddy or Bearable digitize the logging process and provide charts. The friction of daily entry is lower than paper, and apps can prompt you with reminders. Pattern analysis is better than paper — the app shows you charts — but interpretation still requires user effort. You look at a bar chart and decide what it means.

AI-Powered Tracking

Apps that run statistical analysis on your data automatically and surface insights without requiring you to form hypotheses first. The tradeoff is reduced manual control and dependence on algorithms you cannot directly inspect. The benefit is that these systems can detect cross-factor interactions that are effectively invisible to human chart-reading — the combination of three mild risk factors that alone would never catch your attention.

Cross-Factor Analysis: Why Single Variables Miss the Point

This is the most important concept in migraine trigger science, and the one most tracking approaches handle poorly.

Suppose you suspect caffeine is a trigger. You look at your tracking data and find that you had caffeine on 70% of your attack days. Sounds significant. But if you also had caffeine on 65% of your non-attack days, then caffeine has a Relative Risk of roughly 1.07 — essentially noise. The single-variable analysis says caffeine is almost irrelevant. And it might be right — alone.

The attack was not caused by caffeine. It was caused by caffeine on a day with poor sleep and a barometric pressure drop — a combination whose individual components were all sub-threshold.

Migraine research increasingly supports the threshold model: each attack requires the cumulative weight of multiple factors to cross a neurological threshold. Individual factors may never trigger an attack alone, but in combination they reliably do. This is why diary-based single-variable tracking so often fails to identify triggers — you are looking for single needles when the real signal is a pile of smaller ones.

To detect cross-factor interactions, you need either large amounts of data analyzed by statistical tools, or AI-assisted pattern detection. Neither a paper diary nor basic chart-based apps can do this reliably.

Reading Your Data: How to Identify Patterns

After 30+ days of tracking, here is how to begin extracting signal from your data:

Calculate Relative Risk for your top suspects

For each factor you suspect, count: (a) how many days with that factor present resulted in an attack within 24 hours, and (b) how many days with that factor absent resulted in an attack. Divide the first rate by the second. An RR above 1.5 is worth investigating. Below 1.2 is probably noise. This manual calculation is tedious but illuminating — most people are surprised by what their data actually shows.

Look for temporal patterns first

Before diving into factors, look at when attacks happen: day of week, time of day, cycle phase. Temporal clustering is often the first visible pattern and can immediately suggest underlying causes. Attacks clustered on Mondays often mean weekend sleep disruption. Attacks between 6am and 9am often mean poor sleep or caffeine delay. Attacks every 28-30 days often mean hormonal triggers.

Focus on the 48 hours before each attack

Most triggers do not cause immediate attacks. There is typically a 6-48 hour delay between trigger exposure and attack onset. When analyzing factors, look at the day before and two days before an attack, not just the attack day itself. A sleep disruption on Tuesday causing a Thursday attack is easily missed if you only look at Thursday's data.

Talking to Your Doctor: Using Tracking Data in Appointments

A well-maintained tracking record transforms your neurology appointments. Instead of describing your attacks from memory — which research shows is unreliable — you can present data. Here is what your neurologist can do with good tracking data that they cannot do without it:

When you go to your appointment, bring at least 90 days of data. Come with a summary: your average monthly attack frequency, your top 2-3 suspected triggers with supporting data, your most and least effective rescue medications, and your current functional disability level. A prepared patient gets a more targeted treatment plan.

Common Tracking Mistakes

Only tracking on attack days

This is the most fundamental error. If you only log data when you have a migraine, you cannot calculate how often a factor is present without causing an attack. You have the numerator but not the denominator. Without non-attack-day data, every factor you tracked on attack days will appear to be a trigger — even random noise.

Ignoring environmental factors

Weather, barometric pressure, and seasonal factors are among the most commonly identified triggers in large-scale studies, yet they require no lifestyle effort to track. Failing to include environmental data means you may be avoiding foods and activities that are not actually triggering you, while the real culprit — pressure drops or temperature swings — goes undetected.

Stopping too early

Thirty days is enough to see obvious patterns. Sixty days is enough to start making calculations. Ninety days is the minimum for clinically meaningful data. Most people quit in the first two to four weeks — right before the patterns would have appeared. Tracking is boring when nothing seems to be showing up. The signal emerges slowly.

Tracking too many things inconsistently

A dataset with 50 factors logged for three days, then five factors for two weeks, then 30 factors again is not useful for analysis. Consistency of the factors you track matters more than comprehensiveness. Pick the set of factors you can log every single day and stick to them. You can always add factors later.

Treating correlation as causation too quickly

A Relative Risk of 1.8 for red wine is a strong signal — but it is still an association, not a confirmed cause. The real test is prospective: eliminate that factor completely for 4-6 weeks and measure whether your attack frequency drops. Then reintroduce it. This controlled observation is the closest most patients can get to personal clinical evidence.

Your Tracking Timeline

Start tracking with Haven today

Haven handles the analysis automatically — logging 37+ factors, running Relative Risk calculations across your data, and surfacing patterns you would never find manually. The daily check-in takes under a minute. Download free on the App Store.