ArticlePloS one2021
Tracking smell loss to identify healthcare workers with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The assessment of qualitative olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review of tools and their content validity.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Pooled it
- Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Chemical senses · 2023Pooled it
- Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- A patient-centered view of symptoms, functional impact, and priorities in post-COVID-19 syndrome: cross-sectional results from the Québec Action Post-COVID cohort.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Experts' content validation of the parosmia, phantosmia, and anosmia test (PARPHAIT): A qualitative study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Intranasal Insulin for Treatment of Persistent Post-COVID-19 Olfactory Dysfunction: A Scoping Review.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2024Article
- Epidemiology, clinical characteristics and risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Casablanca.Access microbiology · 2023Article
- Anosmia Testing as Early Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Positivity; A Prospective Study under Screening Conditions.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2021Article
- The Circadian Clock, the Brain, and COVID-19: The Cases of Olfaction and the Timing of Sleep.Journal of biological rhythms · 2021Article
- Recent Smell Loss Is the Best Predictor of COVID-19 Among Individuals With Recent Respiratory Symptoms.Chemical senses · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
21 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionHealthcare workers (HCW) treating COVID-19 patients are at high risk for infection and may also spread infection through their contact with vulnerable patients. Smell loss has been associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is unknown whether monitoring for smell loss can be used to identify asymptomatic infection among high risk individuals. In this study we sought to determine if tracking smell sensitivity and loss using an at-home assessment could identify SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCW. METHODS AND
findingsWe performed a prospective cohort study tracking 473 HCW across three months to determine if smell loss could predict SARS-CoV-2 infection in this high-risk group. HCW subjects completed a longitudinal, behavioral at-home assessment of olfaction with household items, as well as detailed symptom surveys that included a parosmia screening questionnaire, and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction testing to identify SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our main measures were the prevalence of smell loss in SARS-CoV-2-positive HCW versus SARS-CoV-2-negative HCW, and timing of smell loss relative to SARS-CoV-2 test positivity. SARS-CoV-2 was identified in 17 (3.6%) of 473 HCW. HCW with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to report smell loss than SARS-CoV-2-negative HCW on both the at-home assessment and the screening questionnaire (9/17, 53% vs 105/456, 23%, P < .01). 6/9 (67%) of SARS-CoV-2-positive HCW reporting smell loss reported smell loss prior to having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and smell loss was reported a median of two days before testing positive. Neurological symptoms were reported more frequently among SARS-CoV-2-positive HCW who reported smell loss compared to those without smell loss (9/9, 100% vs 3/8, 38%, P < .01).
conclusionsIn this prospective study of HCW, self-reported changes in smell using two different measures were predictive of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Smell loss frequently preceded a positive test and was associated with neurological symptoms.
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.