ArticleIranian journal of otorhinolaryngology2018
Evaluation of Culturally-Familiar Odorants for a Persian Smell Identification Test.
Article in Iranian journal of otorhinolaryngology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association Between Satisfaction with Nasal Appearance and Olfactory Function in Patients Undergoing Septorhinoplasty Surgery.Archives of Iranian medicine · 2022Article
- Cultural Adaptation of the Iranian Version of the "Sniffin' Sticks" Olfactory Test.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Article
- Psychophysical olfactory testing in COVID-19: is smell function really impaired in nearly all patients?International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2020Article
- Validity and Reliability of Persian Smell Identification Test.Iranian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionProcessing odor information by the olfactory system depends greatly on the odor concentration. In order to use an odorant in a smell identification test (SIT), the minimum identification concentration (MIC) needs to be determined. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study was conducted in 60 healthy native individuals aged 20 to 60 years, selected from patients' companions in a tertiary hospital. In the first step, 25 odorants were presented to evaluate familiarity among the subjects. Then, the MICs for the eligible odorants were measured using the ascending method of limits.
resultsOut of 25 odorants, only one (cacao) was distinguished by less than 70% of the subjects, and was therefore removed from the list. The MICs of the remaining 24 odorants ranged from 6.87±2.74% for menthol to 27.62±18.98% for cantaloupe. There was significant correlation between age and the MIC only for coffee (P=0.02, r=-0.300). There was a significant difference in MIC between men and women only for hazelnut (P=0.03).
conclusionWe present the MICs of 24 culturally-familiar odorants in a sample of the Persian population in a SIT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29387660PMC5787651What 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.