ArticleKorean journal of family medicine2021
Effects of Oral Procaterol for Postinfectious Cough in Adults: Single-Centre, Randomized Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.
Article in Korean journal of family medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02349919 (Effect of Oral Procaterol on Chronic Persistent Cough Following Upper Respiratory Tract Infection), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Effect of Oral Procaterol on Chronic Persistent Cough Following Upper Respiratory Tract Infection: Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-infectious cough in patients with obesity: an observational study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPersistent cough following an upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) is common in clinical practice. We investigated the effects of procaterol on cough-specific quality of life (QoL) and peripheral-airway function among adults suffering from postinfectious cough (PIC).
methodsThis was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled trial (NCT02349919) conducted at a university hospital. Seventy-four non-asthmatic adults who had persistent post-URTI cough for ≥3 weeks were assessed by a physical examination, chest/paranasal sinus radiographs, spirometry, and impulse oscillometry (IOS) and were allocated to receive procaterol or placebo for 4 weeks. The Thai version of the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ-T), spirometry and IOS were assessed at baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks.
resultsMean LCQ-T total scores for the procaterol group (10.8) and placebo group (10.9) at baseline were not significantly different (P=0.821). After adjustment for baseline Borg Cough Scale score and post-nasal drip, the mean between-group difference was not significant for LCQ-T total score (-1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.69 to 0.17), physical domain score (-0.35; 95% CI, -0.76 to 0.06), psychological domain score (-0.53; 95% CI, -1.06 to 0.01), or social domain score (-0.38; 95% CI, -0.92 to 0.16). Large improvements in LCQ-T total score were reported in both groups after 2 weeks (procaterol, 4.21±2.73; placebo, 5.34±3.2), and 4 weeks (procaterol, 5.94±3.68; placebo, 7.07±3.44). No differences between groups were found in the mean changes of spirometry or IOS parameters after 4 weeks.
conclusionOur study shows that procaterol is not effective in the treatment of PIC, in terms of improvement of cough-specific QoL or peripheral-airway function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.