Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32741085›Full record

SynthesisClinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery2020

Is loss of sense of smell a diagnostic marker in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

John Rocke, Claire Hopkins, Carl Philpott, Nirmal Kumar

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Hearing Loss, Tinnitus, and Dizziness in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Canadian journal of neurological sciences. Le journal canadien des sciences neurologiques · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Is loss of sense of smell a diagnostic marker in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2020
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Comparison Between Intranasal Insulin Films Alone and Combined Intranasal Insulin Plus Steroid Films for Post Viral Olfactory Dysfunction.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. The digital scent device 20: an automated, self-administered odor identification test.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 · 2024
    Article
  19. Treatments for Olfactory Dysfunction in COVID-19: A Systematic Review.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2024
    Review
  20. Article

45 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

John RockeENT Department, Royal Albert Edward Infirmary, Wigan, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2224-0246
Claire HopkinsRhinology, Guy's Hospital London, London, UK.
Carl PhilpottThe Norfolk Smell & Taste Clinic, The Norfolk & Waveney ENT Service, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1125-3236
Nirmal KumarEdge Hill University Medical School, WWL Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo systematically review the currently available evidence investigating the association between olfactory dysfunction (OD) and the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). To analyse the prevalence of OD in patients who have tested positive on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for COVID-19. To perform a meta-analysis of patients presenting with olfactory dysfunction, during the pandemic, and to investigate the positive predictive value for a COVID-19-positive result in this population. To assess whether olfactory dysfunction could be used as a diagnostic marker for COVID-19 positivity and aid public health approaches in tackling the current outbreak.

methodsWe systematically searched MedLine (PubMed), Embase, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), Medrxiv, the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, NIHR Dissemination centre, Clinical Evidence, National Health Service Evidence and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence to identify the current published evidence which associates coronaviridae or similar RNA viruses with anosmia. The initial search identified 157 articles. A total of 145 papers were excluded following application of our exclusion criteria. The 12 remaining articles that presented evidence on the association between COVID-19 and olfactory dysfunction were critically analysed.

resultsOlfactory dysfunction has been shown to be the strongest predictor of COVID-19 positivity when compared to other symptoms in logistic regression analysis. In patients who had tested positive for COVID-19, there was a prevalence of 62% of OD. In populations of patients who are currently reporting OD, there is a positive predictive value of 61% for a positive COVID-19 result.

conclusionOur review has shown that there is already significant evidence which demonstrates an association between OD and the novel coronavirus-COVID-19. It is unclear if this finding is unique to this coronavirus as individual viral phenotypes rarely present in such concentrated large numbers. We have demonstrated that OD is comparatively more predictive for COVID-19 positivity compared to other associated symptoms. We recommend that people who develop OD during the pandemic should be self-isolate and this guidance should be adopted internationally to prevent transmission.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionCOVID-19HumansOlfaction DisordersPredictive Value of TestsPrevalence2019 novel coronavirus diseaseAnosmiaCOVID-19olfaction disordersSARS coronavirusSARS virussmell

Identifiers

PMID32741085
PMCPMC7436734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.