Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29948185›Full record

SynthesisPsychological research2019

Olfactory perception and blindness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Agnieszka Sorokowska, Piotr Sorokowski, Maciej Karwowski, Maria Larsson, Thomas Hummel

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychological research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Influence of visual information on sniffing behavior in a routinely trichromatic primate.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Agnieszka SorokowskaSmell and Taste Clinic, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany. sorokowska@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3999-8851
Piotr SorokowskiInstitute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw, pl. Dawida 1, 50-527, Wrocław, Poland.
Maciej KarwowskiInstitute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw, pl. Dawida 1, 50-527, Wrocław, Poland.
Maria LarssonGösta Ekman Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Frescati Hagväg 9A, 10691, Stockholm, Sweden.
Thomas HummelSmell and Taste Clinic, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
University of Wrocław · PLStockholm University · SETechnische Universität Dresden · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG HU411/18-1Polish National Science Centre OPUS grant #2013/11/B/HS6/01522The Swedish Foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences M14-0375:1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anecdotal reports suggest that blind people might develop supra-normal olfactory abilities. However, scientific evidence shows a mixed pattern of findings. Inconsistent observations are reported for both sensory-driven olfactory tasks (e.g., odor threshold) and higher-order olfactory functions (e.g., odor identification). To quantify the evidence systematically, we conducted a review and meta-analysis. Studies were included if they examined olfactory function (i.e., odor threshold, odor discrimination, free odor identification, or cued odor identification) in blind compared with a sighted control group. Articles were identified through computerized literature search. A total of 18 studies focused on olfactory threshold (n = 1227: 590 blind and 637 sighted individuals), 14 studies targeted discrimination (n = 940: 455 blind and 485 sighted), 14 studies measured cued identification (n = 968: 468 blind and 500 sighted), and 7 studies (n = 443: 224 blind and 219 sighted individuals) assessed free identification. Overall, there were no differences in effect sizes between the blind and sighted individuals after correcting the results for publication bias. We additionally conducted an exploratory analysis targeting the role played by three moderators of interests: participants' age, the proportion of women versus men in each of the studies included into meta-analysis and onset of blindness (early blind vs. late-blind). However, none of the moderators affected the observed results. To conclude, blindness seems not to affect cued/free odor identification, odor discrimination or odor thresholds.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAdultBlindnessFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOdorantsOlfactory PerceptionSensory ThresholdsSmell

Identifiers

PMID29948185
PMCPMC6794238
OpenAlexW2807776009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.