Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 205

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.

Standardization of inhalation provocation tests: two techniques of aerosol generation and inhalation compared.

GERARD F. RYAN, MYRNA B. DOLOVICH, Robin S. Roberts, Peter Anthony Frith, Elizabeth F. Juniper, Frederick E. Hargreave, Michael T. Newhouse·1981·PubMed

Abstract

Comparison of methods of aerosol generation and inhalation is required to improve standardization of inhalation provocation tests. We compared two widely used methods in 10 asthmatics, by measuring the dose and distribution of radiolabeled aerosol deposited in the throat and lung, and the provocation concentration of inhaled histamine required to reduce the FEV1 by 20% (PC20). In one method, aerosol was generated by a DeVilbiss 646 nebulizer attached to a dosimeter, and was inhaled by 5 inspiratory capacity breaths. The measurements with each method were repeated once to determine the reproducibility of results. Both methods deposited the same dose in the lung, but the distribution of the dose was different; the dosimeter method deposited more aerosol in the throat and central airways. The PC20 obtained with each method was the same. The reproducibility of all measurements in the same subject was similar. The lung dose deposited by each method in different subjects varied to the same degree. The results indicated that the bronchial response to inhaled histamine can be measured as reliably using a nebulizer and tidal breathing as by a more complex dose-metering device. They also suggested that, when the methods are regulated as described, the PC20 will have the same clinical significance.

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

OpenAlex · 10.1164/arrd.1981.123.2.195

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 205

Metadata

Authors
RYAN, G. F., DOLOVICH, M. B., Roberts, R. S., Frith, P. A., Juniper, E. F., Hargreave, F. E., & Newhouse, M. T.
Venue
PubMed
Publisher
National Institutes of Health
Published
1981-02-01
Volume
123
Issue
2
Pages
195-9
OpenAlex
W2154707629
Cited by
205
References
0
FWCI
13.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Standardization of inhalation provocation tests: two techniques of aerosol generation and inhalation compared. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/arrd.1981.123.2.195
The paper
RYAN, G. F., DOLOVICH, M. B., Roberts, R. S., Frith, P. A., Juniper, E. F., Hargreave, F. E., & Newhouse, M. T. (1981). Standardization of inhalation provocation tests: two techniques of aerosol generation and inhalation compared. PubMed. https://doi.org/10.1164/arrd.1981.123.2.195

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.