Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18825340›Full record

ReviewHandbook of experimental pharmacology2009

Peripheral mechanisms II: the pharmacology of peripherally active antitussive drugs.

D Spina, I McFadzean, F K R Bertram, C P Page

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Handbook of experimental pharmacology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
17.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Central regulation of the cough reflex: therapeutic implications.Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2009
    Review
  7. Approach to post COVID-19 persistent cough: A narrative review.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

D SpinaSackler Institute of Pulmonary Pharmacology, Division of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, King's College, London SE1 1UL, UK.
I McFadzean
F K R Bertram
C P Page
King's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cough is an indispensable defensive reflex. Although generally beneficial, it is also a common symptom of diseases such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, upper respiratory tract infections, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer. Cough remains a major unmet medical need and although the centrally acting opioids have remained the antitussive of choice for decades, they have many unwanted side effects. However, new research into the behaviour of airway sensory nerves has provided greater insight into the mechanisms of cough and new avenues for the discovery of novel non-opioid antitussive drugs. In this review, the pathophysiological mechanisms of cough and the development of novel antitussive drugs are reviewed.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntitussive AgentsCoughHumansNeurons, AfferentPeripheral Nervous SystemReflexAntitussive Agents

Identifiers

PMID18825340
PMCPMC7122788
OpenAlexW132427770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.