ArticleSaudi medical journal2024
Cross-cultural modification of the University of Pennsylvania smell identification test for the Saudi Arabian population: Validation and normative values.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Point-of-care smell testing for evaluation of olfactory function: a narrative review of clinical utility.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a reliable version of the Saudi Arabian-University of Pennsylvania smell identification test (SA-UPSIT) and to establish normative values for both genders.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was carried out on voluntarily recruited normal participants in King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from April 2018 to May 2023. Culture-familiar odors were chosen and the kit was translated into Arabic for the study. The test was modified 3 times in 4 versions. Following this, a random sample was collected to carry out a re-test after 6 weeks.
resultsA total of 288 subjects participated in the development of the SA-UPSIT across all versions, including 146 females and 142 males. The average age of the participants was 28.4±9.9 years. In the final version, 111 participants scored an average of 34.5±2.5 for the total score, 35±2.3 for females, and 34.1±2.6 for males. The test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.73, indicating acceptable reliability.
conclusionThe new changes carried out to the SA-UPSIT increased the average scores and demonstrated good reliability, making it clinically applicable for diagnosing and monitoring olfactory dysfunction.
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.