ArticleERJ open research2026
Menthol inhalation relieves dyspnoea through the brain.
Article in ERJ open research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Effect of fan-to-face therapy on exertional breathlessness in adults with chronic lung disease.ERJ open research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Menthol inhalation (MI) relieves dyspnoea in healthy individuals and people with respiratory disorders, independent of changes in breathing patterns and respiratory muscle electromyography activity. Thus, the underlying working mechanism of MI is unknown. We tested whether MI reduces dyspnoea by attenuating the neural processing of afferent respiratory sensations, without altering respiratory patterns and the efferent neural drive to breathe. Methods: Thirty healthy adults completed four 5-min trials of strong inspiratory resistive loaded breathing: two with MI and two with strawberry scent inhalation (SI; placebo control), in counterbalanced order. Paired inspiratory occlusions (150 ms) were randomly administered every 2-6 breaths to evoke respiratory-related evoked potentials (RREPs) in the electroencephalogram, reflecting neural processing of respiratory signals. Respiratory parameters were measured continuously, and neural drive to breathe was assessed Results: Dyspnoea intensity (Δ=-0.67 modified Borg units, p=0.003, d=-0.56), air hunger (p<0.001), and mental breathing effort (p=0.004) were lower with MI compared with SI. The RREP P2 mean amplitude was lower with MI (Δ=-1.51 µV, p=0.04, d=0.38), and exploratory analysis revealed an additional reduced "P3frontal" RREP component (p=0.04). Respiratory parameters and P0.1 showed only minor differences between conditions. Conclusions: MI relieved dyspnoea with concurrent changes in the neural processing of respiratory sensations, in the absence of meaningful changes in respiratory patterns or neural drive to breathe. This suggests that MI relieves dyspnoea
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.