Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34285823›Full record

ReviewAllergy & rhinology (Providence, R.I.)

Diagnosis of Anosmia and Hyposmia: A Systematic Review.

Abdul K Saltagi, Mohamad Z Saltagi, Amit K Nag, Arthur W Wu, Thomas S Higgins, Anna Knisely, Jonathan Y Ting, Elisa A Illing

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Allergy & rhinology (Providence, R.I.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Abdul K SaltagiIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7746-4311
Mohamad Z SaltagiIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0410-3010
Amit K NagIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6724-602X
Arthur W WuDivision of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Division of Otolaryngology, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8993-6355
Thomas S HigginsDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
Anna KniselyOtolaryngology, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA.
Jonathan Y TingIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Elisa A IllingIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8497-7876
Indiana University Health · USIndiana University School of MedicineCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USSwedish Medical Center · USUniversity of Louisville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnosmia and hyposmia have many etiologies, including trauma, chronic sinusitis, neoplasms, and respiratory viral infections such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to systematically review the literature on the diagnostic evaluation of anosmia/hyposmia.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating diagnostic modalities for anosmia, written in the English language, used original data, and had two or more patients.

resultsA total of 2065 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 226 abstracts were examined, yielding 27 full-text articles meeting inclusion criteria (Level of evidence ranging from 1 to 4; most level 2). The studies included a total of 13,577 patients. The most utilized diagnostic tools were orthonasal smell tests (such as the Sniffin' Sticks and the UPSIT, along with validated abridged smell tests). Though various imaging modalities (including MRI and CT) were frequently mentioned in the workup of olfactory dysfunction, routine imaging was not used to primarily diagnose smell loss.

conclusionThe literature includes several studies on validity and reliability for various smell tests in diagnosing anosmia. Along with a thorough history and physical, validated orthonasal smell tests should be part of the workup of the patient with suspected olfactory dysfunction. The most widely studied modality was MRI, but criteria for the timing and sequence of imaging modalities was heterogenous.

Indexed as

anosmiaCOVID-19diagnosisfMRIhyposmiainfectionMRIOERPSARS-CoV-2smell losssmell testSPECTtraumaviral

Identifiers

PMID34285823
PMCPMC8264728
OpenAlexW3178497485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.