Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32803385›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2021

Individual variability of olfactory fMRI in normosmia and olfactory dysfunction.

Zang Yunpeng, Pengfei Han, Akshita Joshi, Thomas Hummel

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Olfactory Function and Olfactory Disorders.Laryngo- rhino- otologie · 2023
    Article
  7. [Application research and development of objective examination of olfactory function].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2022
    Article
  8. International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Olfaction.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Zang Yunpeng *Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Interdisciplinary Center Smell and Taste, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstrasse 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany. yunpengzang23@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7506-7646
Pengfei Han *Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Interdisciplinary Center Smell and Taste, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstrasse 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Akshita JoshiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Interdisciplinary Center Smell and Taste, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstrasse 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Thomas HummelDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Interdisciplinary Center Smell and Taste, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstrasse 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DESouthwest University · CNXuzhou Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe diagnosis of olfactory dysfunction is mainly based on psychophysical measurements. The aim of the current study was to investigate how well the olfactory functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can effectively distinguish between normosmic people and subjects with olfactory dysfunction.

methodsThirty-eight participants were recruited for the study. Group 1 consisted of 22 subjects with olfactory dysfunction (mean age = 44.3 years, SD = 18.6), and Group two consisted of 16 participants with normal olfactory function (mean age = 49.6 years, SD = 11.6). Olfactory functions were assessed in great detail for all participants, and brain activation in response to odorous stimulation was assessed using fMRI.

resultsThe between-group comparison showed stronger odor induced brain activation of the primary olfactory area and the insular cortex among the normosmic group as compared to the dysosmic group. As indicated by the individual analysis, positive responses in the primary olfactory cortex were significantly higher in normosmic people (94%) than in subjects with olfactory dysfunction (41%). However, there was no association between individual fMRI parameters (including the percentage of BOLD signal change, activated cluster size and peak z value), and psychophysical olfactory test scores. Receiver operating characteristic analysis suggested the subjects could not be differentiated from normosmics based on their BOLD signal from the primary olfactory area, orbitofrontal cortex, or the insular cortex.

conclusionThere are large inter-individual variabilities for odor-induced brain activation among normosmic subjects and subjects with olfactory dysfunction, due to this variation, at present it appears problematic to diagnose olfactory dysfunction on an individual level using fMRI.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingOlfaction DisordersAdultBrainHumansMiddle AgedOdorantsSmellfMRIIndividual variabilityObjective diagnosisOlfactory dysfunction

Identifiers

PMID32803385
PMCPMC7826297
OpenAlexW3049619781

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.