ArticleInternational forum of allergy & rhinology2018
Establishing the minimal clinically important difference for the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders.
Article in International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04789499 (Smell in Covid-19 and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Smell in Covid-19 and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Saline Nasal Irrigation Plus Theophylline for Treatment of COVID-19-Related Olfactory Dysfunction: The SCENT2 Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2022Trial
- Smell Changes and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline (SCENT) irrigation: A randomized controlled trial for treatment of post-viral olfactory dysfunction.American journal of otolaryngologyTrial
- Recovery of Parosmia Preferentially Influences Longitudinal Improvement of Quality of Life in C19OD.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Olfactory-Related Quality of Life After Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Utility of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements in Age-Related Olfactory Dysfunction.American journal of rhinology & allergy · 2026Article
- Supervised Machine Learning Analysis of Food-Related Quality of Life Impact in Olfactory Dysfunction.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Olfactory Function Recovery in Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Pituitary Surgery.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2025Article
- Distinct inflammatory patterns and nasal bacterial dysbiosis in uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis.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 · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Olfactory Outcomes of Dupilumab in the Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Polyposis.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2025Article
- Altered internetwork functional connectivity and graph analysis of occipital regions in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis accompanied by olfactory dysfunction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Quantitative Analysis of the Minimum Clinically Important Difference in the Brief Pain Inventory After Total Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Reduced Sense of Smell in Patients with Severe Chronic Rhinosinusitis and its Implications for Diagnosis and Management: A Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma in long-lasting post-viral olfactory dysfunction: a case-series.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 · 2024Article
- Predictors of Sinonasal Improvement After Highly Effective Modulator Therapy in Adults with Cystic Fibrosis.The Laryngoscope · 2024Observational
- Clinical studies in COVID-related olfactory disorders: Review of an institutional experience.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2024Article
- [Artificial intelligence-assisted prediction of olfactory disorders in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOlfactory-specific quality of life (QOL) can be measured using the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders Negative Statements (QOD-NS). Changes in the QOD-NS after treatment can be difficult to interpret since there is no standardized definition of clinically meaningful improvement.
methodsPatients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) completed the QOD-NS. Four distribution-based methods were used to calculate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): (1) one-half standard deviation (SD); (2) standard error of the mean (SEM); (3) Cohen's effect size (d) of the smallest unit of change; and (4) minimal detectable change (MDC). We also averaged all 4 of the scores together. Finally, the likelihood of achieving a MCID after sinus surgery using these methods, as well as average QOD-NS scores, was stratified by normal vs abnormal baseline QOD-NS scores.
resultsOutcomes were examined on 128 patients. The mean ± SD improvement in QOD-NS score after surgery was 4.3 ± 11.0 for the entire cohort and 9.6 ± 12.9 for those with abnormal baseline scores (p < 0.001). The MCID values using the different techniques were: (1) SD = 6.5; (2) SEM = 3.1; (3) d = 2.6; and (4) MDC = 8.6. The MCID score was 5.2 on average. For the total cohort analysis, the likelihood of reporting a MCID ranged from 26% to 51%, and 49% to 70% for patients reporting preoperative abnormal olfaction.
conclusionDistribution-based MCID values of the QOD-NS range between 2.6 and 8.6 points, with an average of 5.2. When stratified by preoperative QOD-NS scores the majority of patients reporting abnormal preoperative QOD-NS scores achieved a MCID.
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.