↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic cough in China: an insight into the status quo

Overview of attention for article published in Cough, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Diagnosis and treatment of chronic cough in China: an insight into the status quo
Published in
Cough, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-9974-8-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kefang Lai, Wei Luo, Guangqiao Zeng, Nanshan Zhong

Abstract

Chronic cough is a very common complaint in clinics throughout China. Clinical and basic science research on chronic cough started late, but in recent years the effort has yielded promising findings regarding the etiological diagnosis, treatment and pathogenesis. We found that inflammation in nonasthmatic eosinophilic bronchitis has some similarities to cough variant asthma but also a number of distinct differences. Recent evidence has also suggested a mechanistic link between airway neurogenic inflammation and and gastroesophageal reflux cough (GERC). Cough-related animal models have been developed, including models for esophageal reflux, nonasthmatic eosinophilic bronchitis and allergic rhinitis. Normal reference values for differential cell counts in induced sputum, cough sensitivity and esophageal 24-h pH monitoring in Chinese healthy subjects have been established. By using a modified algorithm for the etiological diagnosis of chronic cough, the causes of chronic cough have been investigated across a number of cities in China. The most common causes of chronic cough are cough variant asthma, eosinophilic bronchitis, upper airway cough symptoms, atopic cough and GERC, however, there are some regional variations. The Chinese National Guidelines on Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Cough were drafted in 2005, updated in 2009, and have been widely publicized and disseminated through many channels since their publication.

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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 8%
Korea, Republic of 1 8%
Unknown 11 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 62%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
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 26 November 2018.
All research outputs
#17,662,702
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Cough
#48
of 61 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,412
of 164,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cough
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 61 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 164,530 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them