Measurement of Olfaction: Screening and Assessment

Parma, Valentina; Boesveldt, Sanne

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-86282-4_3

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 108 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, measures of subjective loss or dysfunction may better capture quality of life issues, including dietary intake (45). Notably, qualitative disorders like parosmia and phantosmia can only be assessed via patient history and self-report, as no objective tests exist for these conditions (3). Our results conflict somewhat with some prior work, as we saw no convincing evidence that thresholds were elevated in those who had recovered from COVID-19.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some consequences include altered diet, a decreased ability to detect dangers such as fire or spoiled food, and feelings of disconnection from the environment and other people. Some estimates suggest up to 1 in 4 people may have some type of olfactory disorder (3). The most common causes for olfactory disorders are head trauma, sinonasal disease, and upper respiratory infections (4, 5), and olfactory disorders are associated with aging (6).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The two most common clinical tests are the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), which is composed of 40 odor identification questions (13), and Sniffin’ Sticks, which measures odor identification, odor discrimination, and odor detection threshold (14) to create a composite score or index of function. In clinical samples, multiple measures of olfactory performance are typically highly, though not fully, correlated (e.g., (3, 15, 16)). Therefore, using just one measure often suffices in normal practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T): A rapid test of olfactory function

Weir

Hannum

Reed

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Many widely-used psychophysical tests of olfaction have limitations that can create barriers to adoption outside research settings. For example, tests that measure the ability to identify odors may confound sensory performance with memory recall, verbal ability, and past experience with the odor. Conversely, threshold-based tests typically avoid these issues, but are labor intensive. Additionally, many commercially available olfactory tests are slow and may require a trained administrator, making them impractical for use in a short wellness visit or other broad clinical assessment. Methods: We tested the performance of the Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T) -- a novel odor detection threshold test that employs an adaptive Bayesian algorithm paired with a disposable odor-delivery card -- in a non-clinical sample of individuals (n=534) at the 2021 Twins Day Festival in Twinsburg, OH. Results: Participants successfully completed the test in under 3 min with a false alarm rate of 9.6% and a test-retest reliability of 0.61. Odor detection thresholds differed by sex (~3.2-fold) and between the youngest and oldest age groups (~8.7-fold), consistent with prior work. In an exploratory analysis, we failed to observe evidence of detection threshold differences between participants who reported a history of COVID-19 and matched controls who did not. We also found evidence for broad-sense heritability of odor detection thresholds. Conclusion: Together, these data indicate the ArOMa-T can determine odor detection thresholds. The ArOMa-T may be particularly valuable in clinical or field settings where rapid and portable assessment of olfactory function is needed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T): A rapid test of olfactory function

Weir

Hannum

Reed

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For a comprehensive summary of tools and measures, see Refs. 19 , 20 . In the context of eating behavior, studies examining the role of fat taste and smell often use a combination of psychophysical methods to measure taste and smell (e.g., sensitivity, preference/liking, and intensity).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of eating behavior, studies examining the role of fat taste and smell often use a combination of psychophysical methods to measure taste and smell (e.g., sensitivity, preference/liking, and intensity). Taste and olfactory sensitivity are measured by determining threshold: the concentration at which a smell or taste is detected or recognized ( 19 – 22 ). Preference is a measure of an individuals’ most preferred concentration of a tastant (taste-invoking chemical molecule) or olfactory cue ( 23 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the biological mediators of fat taste and smell

Jaime-Lara

Brooks

Vizioli

et al. 2023

Physiological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taste and smell play a key role in our ability to perceive foods. Overconsumption of highly palatable energy-dense foods can lead to increased caloric intake and obesity. Thus there is growing interest in the study of the biological mediators of fat taste and associated olfaction as potential targets for pharmacologic and nutritional interventions in the context of obesity and health. The number of studies examining mechanisms underlying fat taste and smell has grown rapidly in the last 5 years. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to summarize emerging evidence examining the biological mechanisms of fat taste and smell. A literature search was conducted of studies published in English between 2014 and 2021 in adult humans and animal models. Database searches were conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science for key terms including fat/lipid, taste, and olfaction. Initially, 4,062 articles were identified through database searches, and a total of 84 relevant articles met inclusion and exclusion criteria and are included in this review. Existing literature suggests that there are several proteins integral to fat chemosensation, including cluster of differentiation 36 (CD36) and G protein-coupled receptor 120 (GPR120). This systematic review will discuss these proteins and the signal transduction pathways involved in fat detection. We also review neural circuits, key brain regions, ingestive cues, postingestive signals, and genetic polymorphism that play a role in fat perception and consumption. Finally, we discuss the role of fat taste and smell in the context of eating behavior and obesity.

show abstract

Predicting Post‐Mortem α‐Synuclein Pathology by the Combined Presence of Probable REM sleep behavior disorder and Hyposmia

Tremblay,

Adler,

Shill

et al. 2024

Movement Disord Clin Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIdiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is a strong known predictor of a final clinicopathological diagnosis of a Lewy type α‐synucleinopathy (LTS). Olfactory dysfunction is an early symptom of synucleinopathies and has been repeatedly associated with the presence of post‐mortem LTS.ObjectiveTo assess the combined value of a clinician diagnosis of probable RBD (PRBD) and hyposmia in predicting the post‐mortem presence of LTS in a broader, less‐selected, volunteer elderly population.MethodsWe studied 652 autopsied subjects from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders, which were evaluated for PRBD, had completed annual movement and cognitive assessments, and had at least one the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) olfactory test.ResultsHistological evidence of LTS was significantly more frequent in those who had PRBD (112/152: 73.7%) than those without (177/494: 35.8%) (P < 0.001). LTS was more frequent in cases with PRBD and a low UPSIT score (90.8%) compared to cases with PRBD only (73.7%) (P < 0.001) or cases with a low UPSIT score only (69.4%) (P < 0.001). Sensitivity of PRBD diagnosis for predicting LTS was 38.8% and specificity 88.8%, whereas sensitivity of a low UPSIT score was 74.4% and specificity 73.4% (Youden's index = 0.276 for PRBD, 0.478 for UPSIT). When combining both measures, sensitivity was 34.3% and specificity increased to 97.2%.ConclusionPRBD, diagnosed without sleep study confirmation, combined with a reduced olfactory performance is highly specific for predicting post‐mortem presence of LTS. The combination of both measures may provide a cost‐effective means of predicting LTS in a broader community.

show abstract

Measurement of Olfaction: Screening and Assessment

Cited by 8 publications

References 108 publications

The Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T): A rapid test of olfactory function

The Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T): A rapid test of olfactory function

A systematic review of the biological mediators of fat taste and smell

Predicting Post‐Mortem α‐Synuclein Pathology by the Combined Presence of Probable REM sleep behavior disorder and Hyposmia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About