ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2023
Comparative Analysis of Olfactory and Gustatory Function of Patients With COVID-19 Olfactory Dysfunction and Non-COVID-19 Postinfectious Olfactory Dysfunction.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lost and Found: Is Olfactory Recovery More Promising After COVID-19 Than Other Causes, Even 2 Years Later?International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of POCOKIDS-Q-A Questionnaire to Assess Post COVID-19 Symptoms in Children.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2025Article
- Olfactory event-related potentials (OERPs) and trigeminal event-related potentials (TERPs) in subjects after Covid-19 infection: single-center prospective study.Journal of applied biomedicine · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is known to have a high incidence of loss of smell and taste. However, studies in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic have evaluated these symptoms using subjective surveys and simple olfactory tests only. Hence, we compared the olfactory and gustatory characteristics of patient groups with COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction (C19OD) and non-COVID-19 postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) using an objective olfactory test and evaluated the significance of olfactory training in both patient groups.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 14 patients with a decreased sense of smell after having positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction results, and 56 patients with PIOD with no history of confirmed COVID-19. Participants were evaluated using the Korean version of the Sniffin' stick (KVSS) II, and chemical gustometry and olfactory training was assessed during their first visit. Olfactory training was then re-evaluated after an average of 8 (± 6) weeks.
resultsThe average age of participants in the C19OD group was lower than in those in the non-COVID-19 PIOD group. The proportion of men in the C19OD group was higher than in the non-COVID-19 PIOD group. At baseline assessment, the C19OD group had better olfactory and gustatory functions. After olfactory training, the non-COVID-19 PIOD patient group showed a significant increase in all KVSS II Total, T, D, and I scores, but there was a non-significant increase in all scores in the C19OD group.
conclusionThe C19OD group had better olfactory and gustatory function than the non-COVID-19 PIOD group at the initial assessment. After olfactory training, there was an increase in olfactory function test scores in both groups. Olfactory training may be helpful in C19OD, as in non-COVID-19 PIOD.
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.