ArticleTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease
Basic assessment of chronic cough in primary care and referral pathways of patients to different specialists.
Article in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Adult Patients with Cough.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2025Guideline
- Are Otolaryngologists Seeing More Cough? Longitudinal Trends and Patterns.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- Consensus goals and standards for specialist cough clinics: the NEUROCOUGH international Delphi study.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Chronic Cough Among Primary Care Doctors: Unmet Needs.Open respiratory archivesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic cough (CC; cough that lasts 8 weeks or longer) poses major effective assessment challenges. Assessment of CC may vary considerably among medical specialists.
objectivesThe aim was to evaluate similarities and consistency of responses across different specialists when performing a basic assessment of CC patients in primary care, and referring patients based on clinical findings or test results.
methodsA modified Delphi approach was used. A survey with 74 statements on initial assessment of CC and referral pathways was addressed to a panel of different specialists, who voted the statements in two rounds.
resultsSeventy-seven physicians [18 primary care physicians (PCPs), 24 pulmonologists, 22 allergists, and 13 ear, nose, and throat specialists] from the National Healthcare System of Spain answered the questionnaire. After two rounds, the panel reached a consensus on 63 out of the 74 proposed items (85.1%). Consensus was not reached among the panelists of at least one specialty on 15 out of these 63 agreed items. The panel agreed on those clinical aspects that should be evaluated by PCPs in all patients with CC including the impact of CC on quality of life. Agreement was reached on initial actions to be taken in primary care, including substitution of drugs that may induce cough, performing a chest X-ray, introduction of anti-reflux measures, initiation of empirical anti-reflux pharmacological therapy in some cases, and performing a spirometry with bronchodilator test and hemogram if an etiological diagnosis was not reached. The panelists agreed on a list of diseases that PCPs should assess before referring CC patients. Algorithms were developed for initial assessment and targeted referral of patients with CC from primary care.
conclusionThis study provides the perspective of different medical specialists on how to perform a basic assessment of CC patients in primary care and how and when to refer patients to other specialists.
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.