ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Odor familiarity and improvement of olfactory identification test in Chinese population.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. 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.
- Age-Related Variation in Odor Identification Performance in Children Assessed with the Brief Smell Identification Test.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Observational
- Cues for odor naming affect performance and brain connectivity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Mind your nose: A randomized controlled trial of olfactory-based memory training for older people with subjective cognitive decline.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: This study aimed to design the Chinese Modified Olfactory Identification (CMOI) test based on the Sniffin' Sticks Olfactory Identification (SSOI) test by changing unfamiliar distractors and odors for more familiar ones for the Chinese population. Materials and methods: We recruited 200 healthy volunteers (103 males and 97 females, aged 18-65 years, mean age 35.04 years, SD 10.96); in a survey, 100 volunteers rated their familiarity with 121 odors, including all the SSOI test odor descriptors and common odors in Chinese daily life. The SSOI test was modified according to the survey results. The other 100 volunteers were tested three times using the SSOI test, the Modified Distractors Olfactory Identification (MDOI) test established by modifying distractors in the SSOI test, and the CMOI test developed by using familiar unpleasant odors to displace the odors with low correct recognition rates in the MDOI test. We compared the test scores of the volunteers during the modification process. Results: Volunteers were unfamiliar with 31 odor descriptors in the SSOI test; 23 distractors with low familiarity were displaced with more familiar distractors. The three odors with the lowest correct recognition rate in the MDOI test (apple, leather, and pineapple) were displaced with familiar unpleasant odors. The test scores were significantly higher in the CMOI test than in others ( Conclusion: The test scores in the CMOI test were significantly improved; it prevented choosing wrongly due to unfamiliarity with an odor and its distractors.
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.