Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37355894›Full record

ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2023

Odor Discrimination as a Marker of Early Alzheimer's Disease.

Egle Audronyte, Gyte Pakulaite-Kazliene, Vaiva Sutnikiene, Gintaras Kaubrys

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Egle AudronyteClinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Gyte Pakulaite-KazlieneClinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Vaiva SutnikieneClinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Gintaras KaubrysClinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Vilnius University · LT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlfactory dysfunction is an early symptom of Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, olfactory tests are rarely performed in clinical practice because their diagnostic efficacy in detecting early AD is unclear.

objectiveTo investigate odor discrimination in patients with early AD and the efficacy of olfactory discrimination tests in differentiating these patients from subjects with normal cognition (CN).

methodsThirty patients each with mild dementia due to AD (MD-AD) and mild cognitive impairment due to AD (MCI-AD) and 30 older subjects with CN were enrolled. All participants underwent cognitive examinations (CDR, MMSE, ADAS-Cog 13, and verbal fluency) and odor discrimination tests (Sniffin' Sticks test, Burghart®, Germany).

resultsThe MD-AD group achieved significantly worse scores on the olfactory discrimination test than the MCI-AD group, and the MCI-AD group achieved significantly worse results than the CN group (p < 0.05). A cut-off score of≤10 had a diagnostic accuracy of 94.44% (95% CI, 87.51-98.17%) in differentiating patients with MCI-AD/MD-AD from subjects with CN and of 91.67% (95% CI, 81.61-97.24%) in differentiating those with MCI-AD from subjects with CN. Our multinomial logistic regression model with demographic data and ADAS-Cog 13 scores as predictor variables correctly classified 82.2% of the cases (CN, 93.3%; MC-AD, 70%; MD-AD, 83.3%); on adding the olfactory discrimination score to the model, the percentage increased to 92.2% (CN, 96.7%; MCI-AD, 86.7%; MD-AD, 93.3%).

conclusionOdor discrimination is impaired in cases of early AD and continues to deteriorate as the disease progresses. The olfactory discrimination test showed good diagnostic efficacy in detecting early AD.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionOlfaction DisordersHumansNeuropsychological TestsOdorantsSmellAlzheimer’s diseasemild cognitive impairmentolfactionolfactory impairment

Identifiers

PMID37355894
PMCPMC10473073
OpenAlexW4381890956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.