ArticleScientific reports2025
Statistical overview of the Sniffin' sticks olfactory test from the perspectives of anosmia and hyposmia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
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
The Sniffin' Sticks test is evaluated by summing the scores of threshold, discrimination, and identification subtests to establish an olfactory diagnosis (anosmia, hyposmia, normosmia). However, variations in thresholds, ranges and inconsistencies have been observed. Statistical analyses (distributions, quantiles), protocol simulation, and implementations of the Sniffin' Sticks test were conducted. This study contributes a statistical revision: determining a cut-off point for the total TDI score, optimising the number of alternatives in the identification subtest, and equalising correct responses (frequency, balanced in time, subsequent pairs). The upper score threshold used to diagnose anosmia is lower than the typical first-order error thresholds applied in comparable assessments (anosmia ≤ 16.75 points, hyposmia ≥ 17 points at 90% confidence level). In the culturally adapted 16-pen Sniffin' Sticks identification tests, the frequency of correct responses was aligned with that of the original test. However, the equalisation of the frequency of adjacent correct response pairs and the temporal occurrence of correct responses was not met in any test. The order of all correct answers that simultaneously satisfied all three matching conditions was determined. The practical significance of the results is that the recommended protocol of the Sniffin' Sticks test system can be implemented in clinical practice with minimal modification.
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.