SynthesisChemical senses2022
Olfaction in pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Chemical senses, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Pregnancy Rhinitis on Olfactory Sensitivity: A Controlled Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prevalence of olfactory dysfunction among postpartum women and impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy.Chemical senses · 2025Article
- Of scents and cytokines: How olfactory and food aversions relate to nausea and immunomodulation in early pregnancy.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2025Article
- Pregnant women exhibit decreased trigeminal sensitivity.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Little attention has been paid to olfactory changes during pregnancy with contemporary studies limited in number and sample size. We examined whether pregnancy is associated with differences in olfactory performance and if there were any specific gestational ages at which these differences occur through a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. An initial electronic database search identified 234 citations, which were screened at the abstract level. Twenty-three citations were germane for full-text review, and 13 met criteria for inclusion. Our review assessed 5 olfactory measures of interest: odor identification (n = 11 articles), threshold (n = 8), discrimination (n = 5), hedonics (n = 6), and intensity (n = 5). Nine of these 13 studies contained sufficient data for meta-analysis, and these studies included a total of 523 pregnant women and 365 non-pregnant controls. Despite previous subjective and objective reports of odor intolerances and odor hypersensitivity, we did not find any significant differences between pregnant and non-pregnant women in odor discrimination, thresholds, or hedonics. However, meta-analysis of 506 cases and 333 controls showed worse odor identification in pregnant women compared to controls in a random-effects model. Thus, we demonstrate worse performance at odor identification during pregnancy. In this review, we discuss the current evidence (and lack thereof) regarding olfaction in pregnancy as well as highlight current knowledge gaps in this field.
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.