Virtual teaching for headache education: Is this the way to go?

Virtual education has rapidly become part of daily professional life. For clinicians and researchers in headache medicine, it offers unprecedented access to teaching and expert discussion, often from parts of the world where travel or dedicated courses were previously impossible. During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual platforms kept education and collaboration alive. Since then, they have quickly evolved into permanent elements of our learning environment. While virtual education has limitations, it may be particularly valuable in headache medicine, where the population burden is high and headache specialists remain scarce. ¹

The International Headache Society (IHS) Learning Centre is a good example of this transformation. It provides lectures, short courses and webinars that can be attended synchronously, enabling interaction between leading experts and participants worldwide, or watched on demand, at the time and in the context most convenient for the learner. These features make education more accessible and continuous. Furthermore, it fills an important gap in education as headache medicine receives limited curricular time and is often underrepresented compared to other neurological and chronic conditions^2,3 despite headache disorders such as migraine and tension-type headache being highly prevalent and burdensome.

Yet, education should be more than the transfer of information. Effective education presupposes the development of core competencies and practical skills. Competency-based education depends on interaction, mentorship and skill-building communication that occurs in clinical settings and at scientific meetings.^4,5 In-person courses, visitorship and congresses remain essential for building networks, practising examination skills and developing the professional confidence that comes from direct supervision and discussion. Learning to take a detailed headache history requires mentorship to provide feedback, and, obviously, real people with headache involved. Performing a nerve block cannot be fully replicated on a screen and requires on-site guidance and supervision. Thus, the strength of virtual teaching lies in preparing, supporting and complementing these important educational practices. Online formats can prepare participants before a course and sustain engagement afterwards. They allow broader participation in discussions that might otherwise be limited by geography or cost. They also facilitate rapid dissemination of new data and guidelines, supporting a continuously learning global headache community.

How should virtual education be performed then? When virtual components are interactive, case-based and well designed, they can match traditional methods in knowledge acquisition.^6,7 As an example, virtual patients can more effectively improve skills, and at least as effectively improve knowledge.^6,7 The skills that improved were clinical reasoning, procedural skills, and a mix of procedural and team skills. The key is to use each format for what it does best: digital tools for access and flexibility, in-person sessions for mentorship, and professional cohesion.

Equity must remain central. Virtual platforms can bridge gaps between high- and low-resource settings, but only if they stay open, affordable and multilingual. The IHS and its partners are uniquely positioned to promote this inclusive approach to education, aligning with the World Health Organization's digital health strategy that emphasises accessibility, transparency and quality. ⁸

Looking forward, artificial intelligence (AI) may advance virtual education and clinical routines by translating complex information into diagnostic reasoning and structured learning pathways. A recent review highlights that generative chatbots can already enhance headache education by supporting patient understanding, clinician training and the dissemination of guidelines in a reliable and scalable manner. ⁹ At the same time, augmented reality may develop skills such as patient taking history and more complex procedures. These innovations are promising, yet they must remain educational tools designed to strengthen rather than replace the interaction between learners, clinicians and people with headache in real clinical settings.

Virtual education is now a permanent layer of headache training, but its value depends on a clear role within the educational process. Rather than competing with in-person teaching, it should be designed to strengthen competency-based learning by offering structured opportunities not only for knowledge acquisition, but also for clinical reasoning, deliberate practice and coaching. To build skills, virtual learning must be meaningfully linked to supervised clinical encounters, where examination skills, procedures, professional behaviours and identity are formed. In an age of infodemics, the priority should be less on producing more content and more on ensuring quality: interactivity, robust approaches to assessing competence, faculty development, and equitable access across languages and resource settings. Emerging tools such as AI-supported learning pathways and augmented/virtual reality may accelerate this evolution, but their promise will be fulfilled only if they remain anchored to mentorship and to the real-world care of people with headache.

Virtual education should not be an alternative to clinical apprenticeship, but an amplifier of it. The future of headache training will depend not on the quantity of digital content produced, but on how deliberately it is integrated with supervised patient care and mentorship. If designed with quality, equity and competence in mind, virtual platforms can expand the reach of headache expertise without diluting its depth. The challenge now is not whether to use virtual education, but how to use it wisely.