ArticleBrain structure & function2021
Some like it, some do not: behavioral responses and central processing of olfactory-trigeminal mixture perception.
Article in Brain structure & function, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Olfactory Stimulation Enhances Trigeminal Responses at the Mucosal Level.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- [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 · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Exploring the potential of eucalyptol as a masking agent for aversive odors, we found that eucalyptol masks the olfactory but not the trigeminal sensation of ammonia in a previous study. Here, we further investigate the processing of a mixture consisting of eucalyptol and ammonia, two olfactory-trigeminal stimuli. We presented the two pure odors and a mixture thereof to 33 healthy participants. The nostrils were stimulated alternately (monorhinal application). We analyzed the behavioral ratings (intensity and pleasantness) and functional brain images. First, we replicated our previous finding that, within the mixture, the eucalyptol component suppressed the olfactory intensity of the ammonia component. Second, mixture pleasantness was rated differently by participants depending on which component dominated their mixture perception. Approximately half of the volunteers rated the eucalyptol component as more intense and evaluated the mixture as pleasant (pleasant group). The other half rated the ammonia component as more intense and evaluated the mixture as unpleasant (unpleasant group). Third, these individual differences were also found in functional imaging data. Contrasting the mixture either to eucalyptol or to both single odors, neural activation was found in the unpleasant group only. Activation in the anterior insula and SII was interpreted as evidence for an attentional shift towards the potentially threatening mixture component ammonia and for trigeminal enhancement. In addition to insula and SII, further regions of the pain matrix were involved when assessing all participant responses to the mixture. Both a painful sensation and an attentional shift towards the unpleasant mixture component complicates the development of an efficient mask because a pleasant perception is an important requirement for malodor coverage.
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.