Anosmia and dysgeusia associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection: an age-matched case–control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anosmia and dysgeusia have been reported as potential symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019. This study aimed to confirm whether anosmia and dysgeusia are specific symptoms among those who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: We conducted an age-matched case-control study in the Eastern Townships region of Quebec between Mar. 10 and Mar. 23, 2020. We included adults (age ≥ 18 yr) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Cases were matched (1:1) according to 5-year age groups with control patents selected randomly from among all patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 during the same period. Demographic and laboratory information was collected from medical records. Clinical symptoms and comorbidities associated with anosmia and dysgeusia were obtained by telephone interview with a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: Among 2883 people tested for SARS-CoV-2, we identified 134 positive cases (70 women [52.2%] and 64 men [47.8%]; median age 57.1 [interquartile range 41.2-64.5] yr). The symptoms independently associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity in conditional logistic regression were anosmia or dysgeusia or both (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 62.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11.0-359.7), presence of myalgia (adjusted OR 7.6, 95% CI 1.9-29.9), blurred vision (adjusted OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0-0.8) and chest pain (adjusted OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0-0.6). INTERPRETATION: We found a strong association between olfactory and gustatory symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 positivity. These symptoms should be considered as common and distinctive features of SARS-CoV-2 infection and should serve as an indication for testing and possible retesting of people whose first test result is negative.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".