Trial reportInternational forum of allergy & rhinology2016
Sensitivity analysis and diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Smell Identification Test in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.
Trial report in International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed.
- Concentration-QTc and cardiac safety analysis of single and multiple zavegepant nasal spray doses in healthy participants to support approval.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024Trial
- Analysis of factors associated with electing endoscopic sinus surgery.The Laryngoscope · 2018Trial
- Defining the minimal clinically important difference for olfactory outcomes in the surgical treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2017Trial
- High Pesticide Exposure Events and Self-Reported and Measured Olfactory Dysfunction.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2026Article
- The Syn-sleep trial protocol: detection of cutaneous phosphorylated alpha-synuclein in REM sleep behavior disorder.Biomarkers in medicine · 2026Article
- Point-of-care smell testing for evaluation of olfactory function: a narrative review of clinical utility.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Review
- A Pilot Study of the Computerized Brief Smell Identification Test.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Pharmacokinetic Properties of an FDA-approved Intranasal Nalmefene Formulation for the Treatment of Opioid Overdose.Clinical pharmacology in drug development · 2024Article
- Ambient Air Pollutants and Olfaction among Women 50-79 Years of Age from the Sister Study.Environmental health perspectives · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Clinical Features and Olfactory Functions in COVID-19: A Multicentre Study.Cureus · 2023Article
- Impact of COVID-19 versus chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis associated olfactory dysfunction on health utility and quality of life.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2022Article
- Olfaction and Physical Functioning in Older Adults: A Longitudinal Study.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2022Article
- Persistent olfactory dysfunction after COVID-19 is associated with reduced perfusion in the frontal lobe.Acta neurologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Assessment of Self-reported Sense of Smell, Objective Testing, and Associated Factors in Middle-aged and Older Women.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2022Article
- Article
- Subjective and psychophysical olfactory and gustatory dysfunction among COVID-19 outpatients; short- and long-term results.PloS one · 2022Article
- The course of subjective and objective chemosensory dysfunction in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a 6-month follow-up.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021Article
- Mucosal Eosinophilia and Neutrophilia Are Not Associated With QOL or Olfactory Function in Chronic Rhinosinusitis.American journal of rhinology & allergy · 2021Article
- Quantitative evaluation and progress of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021Article
- Treatment of Dementia With Bosutinib: An Open-Label Study of a Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT) is an abbreviated version of the Smell Identification Test (SIT) used to assess olfactory function. Although the BSIT can be efficiently administered in under 5 minutes, the accuracy of the BSIT in relation to the SIT in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is unknown.
methodsPatients with CRS were recruited as part of an ongoing multi-institutional observational cohort study. A total of 183 participants provided both BSIT and SIT olfactory function scores during initial enrollment. Linear associations between BSIT and SIT scores were evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficients (rp ). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of BSIT scores were determined using SIT scores as the "gold standard."
resultsA strong bivariate linear association was found between BSIT and SIT scores (rp = 0.893; p < 0.001) for all participants. A significantly lower proportion of patients were identified as having abnormal olfaction using the BSIT compared to the SIT (47% vs 68%, respectively; p < 0.001). Using the currently defined score of ≤8 as a cut-point for abnormal olfactory function, the BSIT demonstrated a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 88% with an overall accuracy of 71%. Increasing the cut-point to ≤9 resulted in an increased sensitivity of 86%, a specificity of 76%, and an improved overall accuracy of 83%.
conclusionIn patients with CRS, BSIT scores strongly correlate with SIT scores; however, the BSIT underestimates olfactory dysfunction as defined by the suggested cut-point of ≤8. Increasing the cut-point to ≤9 increased the sensitivity and accuracy of the BSIT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.