↓ Skip to main content

Detection of Mouse Cough Based on Sound Monitoring and Respiratory Airflow Waveforms

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Detection of Mouse Cough Based on Sound Monitoring and Respiratory Airflow Waveforms
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0059263
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liyan Chen, Kefang Lai, Joseph Mark Lomask, Bert Jiang, Nanshan Zhong

Abstract

Detection for cough in mice has never yielded clearly audible sounds, so there is still a great deal of debates as to whether mice can cough in response to tussive stimuli. Here we introduce an approach for detection of mouse cough based on sound monitoring and airflow signals. 40 Female BALB/c mice were pretreated with normal saline, codeine, capasazepine or desensitized with capsaicin. Single mouse was put in a plethysmograph, exposed to aerosolized 100 µmol/L capsaicin for 3 min, followed by continuous observation for 3 min. Airflow signals of total 6 min were recorded and analyzed to detect coughs. Simultaneously, mouse cough sounds were sensed by a mini-microphone, monitored manually by an operator. When manual and automatic detection coincided, the cough was positively identified. Sound and sound waveforms were also recorded and filtered for further analysis. Body movements were observed by operator. Manual versus automated counts were compared. Seven types of airflow signals were identified by integrating manual and automated monitoring. Observation of mouse movements and analysis of sound waveforms alone did not produce meaningful data. Mouse cough numbers decreased significantly after all above drugs treatment. The Bland-Altman and consistency analysis between automatic and manual counts was 0.968 and 0.956. The study suggests that the mouse is able to present with cough, which could be detected by sound monitoring and respiratory airflow waveform changes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 22%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Professor 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 21 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Engineering 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 22 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 11 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,494,398
of 24,247,965 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#31,181
of 208,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,476
of 200,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#763
of 5,432 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,247,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 208,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 200,834 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,432 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.