Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 325

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation and outcome of patients with chronic non-productive cough using a comprehensive diagnostic protocol

Open access
McGarvey, L P A, Heaney, L G, Lawson, J T, Johnston, B T, Scally, C M, Ennis, M, Shepherd, D R T, MacMahon, J·1998·Thorax

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Asthma, post-nasal drip syndrome (PNDS), and gastro-oesophageal reflux (GOR) account for many cases of chronic non-productive cough (CNPC). Each may simultaneously contribute to cough even when clinically silent, and failure to recognise their contribution may lead to unsuccessful treatment. Methods—Patients (all lifetime non-smokers with normal chest radiographs and spirometric measurements) referred with CNPC persisting for more than three weeks as their sole respiratory symptom underwent histamine challenge, home peak flow measurements, ear, nose and throat (ENT) examination, sinus CT scanning, and 24 hour oesophageal pH monitoring. Treatment was prescribed on the basis of diagnoses informed by investigation results. RESULTS: Forty three patients (29 women) of mean age 47.5 years (range 18–77) and mean cough duration 67 months (range 2–240) were evaluated. On the basis of a successful response to treatment, a cause for the cough was identified in 35 patients (82%) as follows: cough variant asthma (CVA) (10 cases), PNDS (9 cases), GOR (8 cases), and dual aetiologies (8 cases). Histamine challenge correctly predicted CVA in 15 of 17 (88%) positive tests. ENT examination and sinus CT scans each had low positive predictive values for PNDS (10 of 16 (63%) and 12 of 18 (67%) positive cases, respectively), suggesting that upper airways disease frequently co-exists but does not always contribute to cough. When negative, histamine challenge and 24 hour oesophageal pH monitoring effectively ruled out CVA and GOR, respectively, as a cause for cough. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive approach aids the accurate direction of treatment and, while CVA, PNDS and GOR remain the most important causes of CNPC to consider, a group with no identifiable aetiology remains.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/thx.53.9.738

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 325

Metadata

Authors
McGarvey, L. P. A., Heaney, L. G., Lawson, J. T., Johnston, B. T., Scally, C. M., Ennis, M., Shepherd, D. R. T., & MacMahon, J.
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1998-09-01
Volume
53
Issue
9
Pages
738-743
ISSN
  • 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3296
OpenAlex
W1983103499
Cited by
325
References
1
FWCI
8.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation and outcome of patients with chronic non-productive cough using a comprehensive diagnostic protocol. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thx.53.9.738
The paper
McGarvey, L. P. A., Heaney, L. G., Lawson, J. T., Johnston, B. T., Scally, C. M., Ennis, M., Shepherd, D. R. T., & MacMahon, J. (1998). Evaluation and outcome of patients with chronic non-productive cough using a comprehensive diagnostic protocol. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.53.9.738

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.