Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38950019›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

High prevalence of long-term olfactory disorders in healthcare workers after COVID-19: A case-control study.

Johannes Frasnelli, Arnaud Tognetti, Anja L Winter, Evelina Thunell, Mats J Olsson, Nina Greilert, Jonas K Olofsson, Sebastian Havervall, Charlotte Thålin, Johan N Lundström

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Real-World Outcomes of 3-Month Olfactory Training on Post-COVID-19 Parosmia.ORL; journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties · 2025
    Article
  2. Orthonasal and retronasal odor identification in patients with parosmia.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Johannes FrasnelliDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Arnaud TognettiDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anja L WinterDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Evelina ThunellDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mats J OlssonDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Nina GreilertDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jonas K OlofssonDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sebastian HavervallDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Charlotte ThålinDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Johan N LundströmDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3529-8981

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore than a year after recovering from COVID-19, a large proportion of individuals, many of whom work in the healthcare sector, still report olfactory dysfunctions. However, olfactory dysfunction was common already before the COVID-19 pandemic, making it necessary to also consider the existing baseline prevalence of olfactory dysfunction. To establish the adjusted prevalence of COVID-19 related olfactory dysfunction, we assessed smell function in healthcare workers who had contracted COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic using psychophysical testing.

methodsParticipants were continuously tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies since the beginning of the pandemic. To assess the baseline rate of olfactory dysfunction in the population and to control for the possibility of skewed recruitment of individuals with prior olfactory dysfunction, consistent SARS-CoV-2 IgG naïve individuals were tested as a control group.

resultsFifteen months after contracting COVID-19, 37% of healthcare workers demonstrated a quantitative reduction in their sense of smell, compared to only 20% of the individuals in the control group. Fifty-one percent of COVID-19-recovered individuals reported qualitative symptoms, compared to only 5% in the control group. In a follow-up study 2.6 years after COVID-19 diagnosis, 24% of all tested recovered individuals still experienced parosmia.

conclusionsIn summary, 65% of healthcare workers experienced parosmia/hyposmia 15 months after contracting COVID-19. When compared to a control group, the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the population increased by 41 percentage points. Parosmia symptoms were still lingering two-and-a half years later in 24% of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. Given the amount of time between infection and testing, it is possible that the olfactory problems may not be fully reversible in a plurality of individuals.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PersonnelOlfaction DisordersSARS-CoV-2AdultCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceSmell

Identifiers

PMID38950019
PMCPMC11216562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.