ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2008
One hundred coughs: family practice case series.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prevalence, aetiologies and prognosis of the symptom cough in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC family practice · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Celebrating family medicine research.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2011Article
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
objectiveTo record the presentation, diagnosis, management, and outcome of acute coughs presenting in family practice.
designA case series of consecutive patients with acute cough as their main symptom.
settingRural family practice clinic and walk-in centre.
participantsOne hundred consecutive patients with cough, ages 1 to 90.
main outcome measuresClinical diagnosis of the cause of the cough, management of cough, and whether patients returned for a second visit.
resultsSeventy-three patients had viral respiratory tract infections; 15 had asthma; 6 had influenza; 4 had pneumonia; and 2 had croup. Eighty-one patients needed no prescription medication; 13 were prescribed steroids or bronchodilators for asthma; and 6 were prescribed antibiotics. No prescriptions for cough suppressants or decongestants were written. Only 7 patients returned to the clinic; 2 were prescribed antibiotics, and the others had no change in treatment.
conclusionMost patients with cough require reassurance rather than medications, as their cough is self-limiting. Of the minority that requires medication, twice as many will benefit from adjustment of asthma medication as from antibiotics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18272642PMC2278318What 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.