Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15638942›Full record

ArticleRespiratory research2005

Cough quality in children: a comparison of subjective vs. bronchoscopic findings.

Anne Bernadette Chang, Justin Thomas Gaffney, Matthew Michael Eastburn, Joan Faoagali, Nancy C Cox, Ian Brent Masters

Open access · goldAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Respiratory research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 143 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antibiotics for prolonged wet cough in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Clinical pathways for chronic cough in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Anti-histamines for prolonged non-specific cough in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anne Bernadette ChangDept of Paediatrics & Child Health, University of Queensland, Australia. annechang@ausdoctors.net
Justin Thomas Gaffney
Matthew Michael Eastburn
Joan Faoagali
Nancy C Cox
Ian Brent Masters
Queensland Health · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AUUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCough is the most common symptom presenting to doctors. The quality of cough (productive or wet vs dry) is used clinically as well as in epidemiology and clinical research. There is however no data on the validity of cough quality descriptors. The study aims were to compare (1) cough quality (wet/dry and brassy/non-brassy) to bronchoscopic findings of secretions and tracheomalacia respectively and, (2) parent's vs clinician's evaluation of the cough quality (wet/dry).

methodsCough quality of children (without a known underlying respiratory disease) undergoing elective bronchoscopy was independently evaluated by clinicians and parents. A 'blinded' clinician scored the secretions seen at bronchoscopy on pre-determined criteria and graded (1 to 6). Kappa (K) statistics was used for agreement, and inter-rater and intra-rater agreement examined on digitally recorded cough. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine if cough quality related to amount of airway secretions present at bronchoscopy.

resultsMedian age of the 106 children (62 boys, 44 girls) enrolled was 2.6 years (IQR 5.7). Parent's assessment of cough quality (wet/dry) agreed with clinicians' (K = 0.75, 95%CI 0.58-0.93). When compared to bronchoscopy (bronchoscopic secretion grade 4), clinicians' cough assessment had the highest sensitivity (0.75) and specificity (0.79) and were marginally better than parent(s). The area under the ROC curve was 0.85 (95%CI 0.77-0.92). Intra-observer (K = 1.0) and inter-clinician agreement for wet/dry cough (K = 0.88, 95%CI 0.82-0.94) was very good. Weighted K for inter-rater agreement for bronchoscopic secretion grades was 0.95 (95%CI 0.87-1). Sensitivity and specificity for brassy cough (for tracheomalacia) were 0.57 and 0.81 respectively. K for both intra and inter-observer clinician agreement for brassy cough was 0.79 (95%CI 0.73-0.86).

conclusionsDry and wet cough in children, as determined by clinicians and parents has good clinical validity. Clinicians should however be cognisant that children with dry cough may have minimal to mild airway secretions. Brassy cough determined by respiratory physicians is highly specific for tracheomalacia.

Indexed as

AustraliaBronchoscopyChild, PreschoolCoughFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySeverity of Illness IndexSingle-Blind Method

Identifiers

PMID15638942
PMCPMC545936
OpenAlexW1496717739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.