ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Assessment of cough in asthma patients attending clinic using the cough questionnaire for asthma (CQA).
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Phenotypes and endotypes of cough in asthma.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cough is a common and troublesome symptom in asthma that can persist despite treatment, but there is no tool to specifically assess cough in asthma patients. We developed the Cough Questionnaire for Asthma (CQA) to evaluate cough severity and its impact in asthma patients. Methods: We developed an 8-item questionnaire to assess cough severity and its impact, which was later refined to a 6-item version (CQA6). The questionnaire was validated in 289 asthma patients attending a hospital asthma clinic. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Concurrent validity was evaluated through correlations with the 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ6), the Cough Hypersensitivity Questionnaire (CHQ), and both patient and physician cough severity ratings (in a 5-point Liker scale). Repeatability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis of responses obtained 3-6 months later. Results: CQA6 demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha =0.898) and strong correlations with patient-rated cough control (r=0.769), physician-rated cough control (r=0.692), and ACQ6 scores (r=0.672). CQA6 showed moderate correlation with CHQ scores (r=0.574). In longitudinal assessment, changes in CQA6 scores correlated strongly with changes in patient-assessed cough control (r=0.608) and ACQ6 (r=0.647). The ICC for CQA6 was 0.800 in stable patients, demonstrating good repeatability. Conclusions: CQA6 is a reliable and valid tool for assessing cough severity and its impact in asthma patients. It will help in the evaluation of cough as an important contributory symptom for asthma management.
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.