Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36943439›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 Surgery2023

Comparison of prevalence and evolution of COVID-19 olfactory disorders in patients infected by D614 (wild) and B.1.1.7. Alpha variant: a brief report.

Jerome R Lechien, Shannon Wajsblat, Mihaela Horoi, Paolo Boscolo-Rizzo, Serge D Le Bon, Luigi A Vaira, Sven Saussez

Open access · bronzeAbstract 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Jerome R Lechien *Department of Otolaryngology, Polyclinic of Poitiers, Elsan, Poitiers, France. Jerome.Lechien@umons.ac.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0845-0845
Shannon Wajsblat *Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, CHU Saint-Pierre, Brussels, Belgium.
Mihaela HoroiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, CHU Saint-Pierre, Brussels, Belgium.
Paolo Boscolo-RizzoDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, Section of Otolaryngology, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy.
Serge D Le BonDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, CHU de Genève, Geneva, Suisse.
Luigi A Vaira *Maxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Pharmacy, University of Sassari, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Sven Saussez *Division of Laryngology and, Bronchoesophagology, EpiCURA Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, UMONS Research Institute for Health Sciences and Technology, University of Mons (UMons), Mons, Belgium.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Pierre · BEUniversity of Mons · BEUniversity of Sassari · ITUniversity of Trieste · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the prevalence and the evolution of olfactory disorders (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients infected during the first and the second European waves.

methodsFrom March 2020 to October 2020, COVID-19 patients with OD were recruited and followed over the 12-month post-infection. The following data were collected: demographic, treatments, vaccination status, and olfactory function. Olfaction was assessed with the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire (ODQ), and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Outcomes were compared between patients of the first wave (group 1: wild/D614G virus) and the second wave (group 2: B.1.1.7. Alpha variant) at 1-, 3- and 12-month post-infection.

resultsSixty patients completed the evaluations accounting for 33 and 27 patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. The 1-month TDI score (23.7 ± 5.3) was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (29.8 ± 8.7; p = 0.017). Proportion of normosmic patients at 1-month post-infection was significantly higher in group 1 compared to group 2 (p = 0.009). TDI scores only significantly increased from 1- to 3-month post-infection in anosmic and hyposmic patients. Focusing on There was a negative association between the 1-month ODQ and the 1-month TDI (r

conclusionsPatients of the second wave (Alpha B.1.1.7. variant) reported significant higher proportion of psychophysical test abnormalities at 1-month post-infection than patients infected during the first wave (D614G virus).

Indexed as

COVID-19Olfaction DisordersHumansPrevalenceSARS-CoV-2SmellAnosmiaCOVID-19OlfactoryOtolaryngologyParosmiaRecoveryRhinologySARS-CoV-2SmellVariant

Identifiers

PMID36943439
PMCPMC10029791
OpenAlexW4328048468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.