Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32775017›Full record

ReviewTremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.)2020

Auditory and Olfactory Deficits in Essential Tremor - Review of the Current Evidence.

Yildizhan Sengul

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yildizhan SengulDepartment of Neurology, Gaziosmanpasa Training and Research Hospital, University of Medical Sciences, Gaziosmanpasa, Istanbul, TR.
Gaziosmanpaşa Taksim Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Essential tremor (ET) is the most common adult movement disorder, characterized by several motor and increasingly well recognized non-motor symptoms. Sensory deficits, such as hearing impairment and olfactory dysfunction, are amongst them. This review analyzes the available evidence of these sensory deficits and their possible mechanistic basis in patients with ET. Method: A PubMed literature search on the topic was performed in the May 2019 database. Results: Nineteen articles on hearing impairment and olfactory dysfunction in ET patients were identified. The prevalence of hearing impairment is higher in ET patients than healthy controls or Parkinson disease. Cochlear pathologies are suggested as the underlying cause, but there is still a lack of information about retrocochlear pathologies and central auditory processing. Reports on olfactory dysfunction have conflicting results. The presence of mild olfactory dysfunction in ET was suggested. Conflicting results may be due to the lack of consideration of the disease's heterogeneity, but according to recent data, most studies do not find prominent evidence of olfactory loss in ET. Conclusion: Although there is increasing interest in studies on non-motor symptoms in ET, there are few studies on sensory deficits, which are of particularly high prevalence. More studies are needed on to investigate the basis of non-motor symptoms, including sensory deficits.

Indexed as

Case-Control StudiesCochlear DiseasesEssential TremorHearing LossHumansOlfaction DisordersPrevalenceessential tremorhearing impairmentneurodegenerative diseasenon-motor featuresolfactory dysfunctionsensory deficit

Identifiers

PMID32775017
PMCPMC7394198
OpenAlexW3034433750

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.