ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2026
A new framework for the labeling of odors in the Sniffin' Sticks odor identification test: relevance of familiarity and test-retest assessment.
Article in 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, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Sniffin' Sticks test is among the most commonly used methods of olfactory assessment and has been successfully adapted across various countries. However, to date, no study has examined cultural changes over time, within the same country. The present research is the first to explore the adaptation of odor labels to contemporary contexts.
methodsA total of 83 normosmic participants (57 women) aged 18 to 75 years (y) (M = 35.2 y, SD = 13.7) were enrolled in four studies in which we replaced the unfamiliar odor labels with more familiar ones and balanced the frequency of labels used in the entire set of odor labels. Lastly, forty additional healthy participants (28 women) aged from 18 to 61 y (M = 32.8 y, SD = 11.4) were recruited to assess the test-retest reliability of the newly developed version of SS-OIT labeling within a period ranging from 1 to 57 days (M = 14.8 days, SD = 13.2).
resultsWe aimed to increase the number of labels that are known by the present population, and hence, we modified 31% of the odor labels. The correlation coefficient of the new SS-OIT test-retest was moderate (R = .66 which changed to R = .71 after excluding an outlier, p < .001), which is typical for 16-item olfactory tests when tried in a normosmic population.
conclusionThis study introduces a fresh approach to SS-OIT labeling via a careful refinement and validation of an existing test that aligns more closely with evolving cultural trends. We also confirm the suitability of the new SS-OIT for clinical and research assessment.
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.