ArticleEvolution, medicine, and public health2023
Humans can detect axillary odor cues of an acute respiratory infection in others.
Article in Evolution, medicine, and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Italian validation of the body odor disgust scale.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2024Article
- Biosensors for Odor Detection: A Review.Biosensors · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Body odor conveys information about health status to conspecifics and influences approach-avoidance behaviors in animals. Experiments that induce sickness in otherwise healthy individuals suggest that humans too can detect sensory cues to infection in others. Here, we investigated whether individuals could detect through smell a naturally occurring acute respiratory infection in others and whether sickness severity, measured via body temperature and sickness symptoms, was associated with the accuracy of detection. Methodology: Body odor samples were collected from 20 donors, once while healthy and once while sick with an acute respiratory infection. Using a double-blind, two-alternative forced-choice method, 80 raters were instructed to identify the sick body odor from paired sick and healthy samples (i.e. 20 pairs). Results: Sickness detection was significantly above chance, although the magnitude of the effect was low (56.7%). Raters' sex and disgust sensitivity were not associated with the accuracy of sickness detection. However, we find some indication that greater change in donor body temperature, but not sickness symptoms, between sick and healthy conditions improved sickness detection accuracy. Conclusion and implications: Our findings suggest that humans can detect individuals with an acute respiratory infection through smell, albeit only slightly better than chance. Humans, similar to other animals, are likely able to use sickness odor cues to guide adaptive behaviors that decrease the risk of contagion, such as social avoidance. Further studies should determine how well humans can detect specific infections through body odor, such as Covid-19, and how multisensory cues to infection are used simultaneously.
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.