ArticleLung2008
Rebuttal: cough is an expiratory sound.
Article in Lung, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline
- Measuring cough: what really matters?Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Review
- A systematic review on cough sound analysis for Covid-19 diagnosis and screening: is my cough sound COVID-19?PeerJ. Computer science · 2022Article
- The present and future of cough counting tools.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Methacholine-Induced Cough in the Absence of Asthma: Insights From Impulse Oscillometry.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
- Changing the paradigm for cough: does 'cough hypersensitivity' aid our understanding?Asia Pacific allergy · 2014Review
- Review
- Semantics and types of cough.Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2009Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
What is a cough was debated at much length in the European Respiratory Society's Task Force on Cough Methodology. A definition favored by physiologists is "an inspiration followed by a characteristic expiration." Clinicians involved in cough counting favor "an expiration with a characteristic sound." Both are entirely arbitrary. We undertook a survey of clinicians and scientists working in the field and asked them to count examples of different coughs. The clinical definition was adopted by the majority and we suggest that it should be the gold standard.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17990037What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.