Comparison of Patient Characteristics and Olfactory Sensitivity for Trigger Odorants in Parosmia and Phantosmia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the characteristics of patients with qualitative olfactory dysfunction (qualOD) and whether individuals with parosmia exhibit increased olfactory sensitivity to previously reported odorous triggers of parosmia. METHODS: This study included individuals aged ≥18 years, divided into quantitative OD only, parosmia, and phantosmia groups. Data collected included: clinical-demographic data, "Sniffin' Sticks" scores, questionnaires (depression scale, importance of olfaction), and information about parosmia and phantosmia. A proportion of patients underwent trigger odor threshold testing for 2-Furfurylthiol [FFT] found in coffee and 2,6-nonadienal [Nonadienal] found in cucumber. RESULTS: Those with parosmia were typically younger women, with shorter OD duration due to post-viral OD (PVOD), hyposmic/normosmic, and experienced parosmia more severely. Parosmia was 3.5 times more likely in PVOD. Those with phantosmia were older, with longer OD duration due to idiopathic OD, hyposmic/anosmic, and experienced phantosmia less severely. There were no significant differences between FFT and Nonadienal threshold scores in patients with parosmia, phantosmia, or only quantitative OD, but all groups had significantly increased olfactory sensitivity for trigger odors compared to phenyl ethyl alcohol (PEA). CONCLUSION: Parosmia and phantosmia patients have distinct characteristics. This may provide clinicians with a better understanding of possible olfactory outcomes in these patients. The higher olfactory sensitivity of all groups to trigger odors compared to PEA raises interesting points about parosmia triggers and odors in the context of warning for danger, in relation to the pathophysiology of parosmia that may be worth exploring in future studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 134:3277-3285, 2024.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".