ArticleInternational forum of allergy & rhinology2026
Lost and Found: Is Olfactory Recovery More Promising After COVID-19 Than Other Causes, Even 2 Years Later?
Article in International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOlfactory dysfunction is a hallmark feature of COVID-19, yet the potential for recovery with long-standing COVID-19-related smell loss (CRSL) remains uncertain, particularly when treatment is initiated years later. This study evaluated olfactory outcomes in patients with CRSL compared with non-COVID-19-related smell loss (non-CRSL), with emphasis on delayed treatment initiation.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 104 patients evaluated at a tertiary clinic between January 2023 and February 2025, comprising 47 patients with CRSL and 57 with non-CRSL. All patients completed serial Sniffin' Sticks testing (threshold, discrimination, and identification [TDI]) at ≥2 visits. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as a ≥5.5-point increase in TDI score. All patients received olfactory training combined with twice-daily steroid nasal irrigation. Subgroup analyses examined delayed treatment initiation (>2 years), treatment adherence, and COVID-19 vaccination status.
resultsBaseline TDI scores were higher in the CRSL group than in the non-CRSL group (19.6 ± 6.3 vs. 16.8 ± 6.8; p < 0.05). The CRSL group demonstrated significant improvement in TDI scores at follow-up (19.6 ± 6.3 to 23.9 ± 6.5; p < 0.001), with 46% achieving MCID, whereas the non-CRSL group showed no significant change. Among CRSL patients initiating therapy >2 years after onset (n = 36; mean 30.8 ± 5.5 months), 50% achieved MCID. Treatment adherence was strongly associated with improvement, whereas COVID-19 vaccination showed a favorable but attenuated association after adjustment.
conclusionsClinically meaningful olfactory recovery remains achievable with long-standing CRSL, even when treatment is initiated >2 years after onset. Prospective studies are needed to clarify causal relationships given known spontaneous recovery in post-viral 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.