ArticleBMC medicine2026
Objective assessment of long-term impact of COVID-19 on multiple sensory functions.
Article in BMC medicine, 2026. 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.
- Accuracy and Precision of the Subjective Visual Vertical According to Age in Adults With/Without Diabetes.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis ongoing study investigates the impact of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) on broad sensory functions.
methodsSixty subjects aged 27-78 years were recruited who had contracted COVID-19 between 1/17/2020 and 12/21/2023 and had persistent symptoms (4.3-52.9, median = 27.48 months). Quantitative sensory assessments included (1) smell: 9-Item NIH toolbox odor identification, detection threshold to phenyl-ethyl alcohol, and retronasal candy test; (2) taste: modified NIH toolbox; (3) chemesthesis: nasal menthol lateralization thresholds and oral capsaicin identification; (4) hearing: pure-tone audiometry, otoacoustic emissions, words-in-noise recognition, and Dichotic Digits Test; (5) vestibular/balance: video head impulse testing, Subjective Visual Vertical, vestibular perceptual thresholds, and modified Romberg balance test; and (6) cognitive assessment: The Self-Administered Gero-Cognitive Exam, Digit Symbol Substitution Test, and Trail-Making Test.
resultsOverall, subjects self-reported high and overlapping dysfunctions: 67.3% smell, 63.6% taste, 56.5% balance and dizziness, 31.8% auditory, and 51.3% brain fog or cognitive dysfunctions, with varying discrepancy to the measured and confirmed deficits (smell 65.5%, taste 16%, vestibular 31.6%, hearing 53.4%, and cognition 19.1%). Significant associations were found between confirmed vestibular and auditory impairments (p = 0.04), and cognitive impairments with central components of vestibular (p = 0.03) and auditory (p = 0.01) impairments, but not with their peripheral components. Similarly, strong associations were found between identification components of smell and taste tests (p = 0.003), which may involve more central processing, but not with threshold tests (a more peripheral process). Hospitalization significantly associated with smell (p = 0.05), cognitive (p = 0.009), vestibular (p = 0. 001), and peripheral auditory (p = 0.01) dysfunctions. Age significantly associated with auditory (p = 0.02), vestibular (p = 0.01) and central olfactory (p = 0.03) dysfunctions.
conclusionsCOVID-19 impacts sensory systems broadly and differently, both peripherally and centrally, driven in part by aging, initial disease severity, and underlying post-COVID cognitive dysfunctions. Subjective symptoms may not always be corroborated by measured deficits.
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.