↓ Skip to main content

Cough expired volume and airflow rates during sequential induced cough

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Cough expired volume and airflow rates during sequential induced cough
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2013.00167
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen W. Hegland, Michelle S. Troche, Paul W. Davenport

Abstract

Cough effectiveness is determined by a combination of volume of air expired and maximum expiratory airflow rate. Studies of cough sensitivity identify cough thresholds based on at least 2 or 5-cough re-accelerations to a stimulus, however, to date no study has examined the interplay between the distribution of cough expired air and cough airflow rates for these induced sequential coughs. The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between reflex cough re-accelerations, cough airflow and cough inspired and expired volume. Twenty adults (18-40 years, four men) volunteered for study participation, and were outfitted with a facemask in-line with a pneumotachograph and a one-way valve for capsaicin delivery on inspiration. Cough inspired and expired volume (Liters of air) as well as airflow parameters (peak expiratory flow rates L/s) were measured for each cough response. Results demonstrate significant linear relationships between cough expired volume, flow rates, and the total number of coughs produced. Thus, as the number of coughs in an epoch increase, the mechanical effectiveness of coughs within the epoch may decrease according to peak expiratory flow rates and cough expired volume, particularly for coughs comprised of more than 3 re-accelerations.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 14%
Student > Master 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 31%
Engineering 8 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
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 05 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,195,877
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,302
of 13,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,765
of 280,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#243
of 398 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 398 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.