ArticleIBRO reports2019
A machine-learned analysis suggests non-redundant diagnostic information in olfactory subtests.
Article in IBRO reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Association between cognition and olfaction-specific parameters in patients with 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 · 2023Article
- Proof-of-concept: SCENTinel 1.1 rapidly discriminates COVID-19-related olfactory disorders.Chemical senses · 2023Article
- Proof-of-concept: SCENTinel 1.1 rapidly discriminates COVID-19 related olfactory disorders.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2022Article
- Sorting of Odor Dilutions Is a Meaningful Addition to Assessments of Olfactory Function as Suggested by Machine-Learning-Based Analyses.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
- Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Clinical Implications of Psychophysical Olfactory Testing: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Treatment Outcome.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- Machine-learning-derived rules set excludes risk of Parkinson's disease in patients with olfactory or gustatory symptoms with high accuracy.Journal of neurology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe functional performance of the human sense of smell can be approached via assessment of the olfactory threshold, the ability to discriminate odors or the ability to identify odors. Contemporary clinical test batteries include all or a selection of these components, with some dissent about the required number and choice.
methodsOlfactory thresholds, odor discrimination and odor identification scores were available from 10,714 subjects (3662 with anomia, 4299 with hyposmia, and 2752 with normal olfactory function). To assess, whether the olfactory subtests confer the same information or each subtest confers at least partly non-redundant information relevant to the olfactory diagnosis, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of supervised machine learning algorithms trained with the complete information from all three subtests with that obtained when performing the training with the information of only two or one subtests.
resultsThe training of machine-learned algorithms with the full information about olfactory thresholds, odor discrimination and odor identification from 2/3 of the cases, resulted in a balanced olfactory diagnostic accuracy of 98% or better in the 1/3 remaining cases. The most pronounced decrease in the balanced accuracy, to approximately 85%, was observed when omitting olfactory thresholds from the training, whereas omitting odor discrimination or identification was associated with smaller decreases (balanced accuracies approximately 90%).
conclusionsResults support partly non-redundant contributions of each olfactory subtest to the clinical olfactory diagnosis. Olfactory thresholds provided the largest amount of non-redundant information to the olfactory diagnosis.
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.