ArticleFamily practice2023
Nonpharmacological home remedies for upper respiratory tract infections: a cross-sectional study of primary care patients in Switzerland and France.
Article in Family practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pelargonium sidoides extract (EPs® 7630) versus usual care for acute bronchitis in Swiss primary care (PHYTOBRONCH): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Trial
- Who are the patients who use non-pharmacological home remedies? Cross-sectional study in Switzerland and France.Family practice · 2024Article
- Well-Established and Traditional Use of Vegetal Extracts as an Approach to the "Deep Roots" of Cough.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany patients might be tempted to use nonpharmacological home remedies (NPHRs) to relieve upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) symptoms. However, primary care physicians (PCPs) rarely recommend NPHRs due to a lack of knowledge in this field. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey among primary care patients in Switzerland and France to explore which NPHRs they use and consider effective for 3 common URTI symptoms: sore throat/cough/common cold.
methodsUsing official physician registries, we randomly selected 50 PCPs in Geneva (Switzerland) and Lyon/Grenoble (France). Seven research assistants were involved in the recruitment of consecutive patients from the waiting rooms of these PCPs (20-25 patients per practice). Patients were asked to complete a paper-based questionnaire to assess the use and perceived effectiveness of 72 NPHRs for URTI symptoms. The list of NPHRs was developed by our research team with the help of 97 patients. Remedies were considered effective if patients reported that they were effective/very effective. Data were analysed descriptively.
resultsOf the 1,198 eligible patients, 1,012 agreed to participate (84.5%). The 4 most frequently used NPHRs were honey/lemon/thyme/herbal teas. Most patients using these NPHRs considered them as effective (between 77% of patients for onion syrup for cough and 94% of patients for thyme inhalations for common colds).
conclusionsMany patients reported using honey/lemon/thyme/herbal teas for URTI symptoms, and generally considered these treatments to be effective. Future research should explore the extent to which these remedies can be safely proposed as alternatives for the symptomatic treatment of ear/nose/throat complaints in primary care.
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.