↓ Skip to main content

Neural dysfunction following respiratory viral infection as a cause of chronic cough hypersensitivity

Overview of attention for article published in Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neural dysfunction following respiratory viral infection as a cause of chronic cough hypersensitivity
Published in
Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, June 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.pupt.2015.06.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bradley J. Undem, Eric Zaccone, Lorcan McGarvey, Stuart B. Mazzone

Abstract

Respiratory viral infections are a common cause of acute coughing, an irritating symptom for the patient and an important mechanism of transmission for the virus. Although poorly described, the inflammatory consequences of infection likely induce coughing by chemical (inflammatory mediator) or mechanical (mucous) activation of the cough-evoking sensory nerves that innervate the airway wall. For some individuals, acute cough can evolve into a chronic condition, in which cough and aberrant airway sensations long outlast the initial viral infection. This suggests that some viruses have the capacity to induce persistent plasticity in the neural pathways mediating cough. In this brief review we present the clinical evidence of acute and chronic neural dysfunction following viral respiratory tract infections and explore possible mechanisms by which the nervous system may undergo activation, sensitization and plasticity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Neuroscience 4 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 7%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 July 2015.
All research outputs
#17,283,763
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#546
of 828 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,145
of 277,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 828 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.