ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Assessment of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction and its association with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Presentation and temporal nature of postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a US national cohort.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2026Article
- Longitudinal evaluation of neurocognitive outcomes in a cohort with persistent post-COVID olfactory dysfunction.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Review
- Cytokine signatures associated with persistent antibody responses to multipleFrontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Depression, Anxiety, and Neuropsychiatric Symptom Burden in a Longitudinal Cohort with Persistent Psychophysical Post-COVID Olfactory Dysfunction.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Article
- Psychological Distress in Patients with Long-lasting COVID-19 Olfactory Dysfunction.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialeArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose of review: To provide a detailed overview of the assessment of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction and its association with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms. Recent findings: COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction can have a detrimental impact to the quality of life of patients. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, olfactory and taste disorders were a common but under-rated, under-researched and under-treated sensory loss. The pandemic has exacerbated the current unmet need for accessing good healthcare for patients living with olfactory disorders and other symptoms secondary to COVID-19. This review thus explores the associations that COVID-19 has with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms, and provide a framework and rationale for the assessment of patients presenting with COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. Summary: Acute COVID-19 infection and long COVID is not solely a disease of the respiratory and vascular systems. These two conditions have strong associations with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms. A systematic approach with history taking and examination particularly with nasal endoscopy can determine the impact that this has on the patient. Specific olfactory disorder questionnaires can demonstrate the impact on quality of life, while psychophysical testing can objectively assess and monitor olfaction over time. The role of cross-sectional imaging is not yet described for COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction. Management options are limited to conservative adjunctive measures, with some medical therapies described.
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.