ArticleScientific reports2016
Machine-learned pattern identification in olfactory subtest results.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitamin A-Containing Intranasal Drops Improve Odour Detection Threshold.ORL; journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties · 2026Article
- Augmenting small biomedical datasets using generative AI methods based on self-organizing neural networks.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Unsupervised Clustering of Olfactory Phenotypes.American journal of rhinology & allergy · 2022Article
- Machine-Learning Points at Endoscopic, Quality of Life, and Olfactory Parameters as Outcome Criteria for Endoscopic Paranasal Sinus Surgery in Chronic Rhinosinusitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- A machine-learned analysis suggests non-redundant diagnostic information in olfactory subtests.IBRO reports · 2019Article
- Machine Learning in Human Olfactory Research.Chemical senses · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The human sense of smell is often analyzed as being composed of three main components comprising olfactory threshold, odor discrimination and the ability to identify odors. A relevant distinction of the three components and their differential changes in distinct disorders remains a research focus. The present data-driven analysis aimed at establishing a cluster structure in the pattern of olfactory subtest results. Therefore, unsupervised machine-learning was applied onto olfactory subtest results acquired in 10,714 subjects with nine different olfactory pathologies. Using the U-matrix, Emergent Self-organizing feature maps (ESOM) identified three different clusters characterized by (i) low threshold and good discrimination and identification, (ii) very high threshold associated with absent to poor discrimination and identification ability, or (iii) medium threshold, i.e., in the mid-range of possible thresholds, associated with reduced discrimination and identification ability. Specific etiologies of olfactory (dys)function were unequally represented in the clusters (p < 2.2 · 10
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.