Concordance of anosmia between household members affected by COVID-19 infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Alterations in smell (anosmia) and taste (dysgeusia) are common with SARS-CoV-2. The study objective was to evaluate for concordance in anosmia and dysgeusia among household members affected by COVID-19. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of individuals followed by the COVIDEO program at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre was performed for patients ≥4 years old diagnosed with COVID-19 between April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020. Households were identified, and index cases were selected based on the first subject assessed by COVIDEO. Controls for each household contact were identified from the COVIDEO database by matching age (within 10 years) and date of diagnosis (closest within 3 months thereafter). Concordance of anosmia and dysgeusia was determined between index cases and household contacts compared to nonhousehold controls. Results: A total of 353 households were identified: 963 subjects (353 index cases, 600 household contacts) and 600 controls. Median age was 30 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 16, 49), and 50% (475/953) were women. Prevalence of anosmia and dysgeusia were 23.6% and 22.7%, respectively. Anosmia concordance was 64.3% between index cases and nonhousehold controls, compared to 65.7% ( p = 0.09) between index cases and nongenetically related household members, and 69.4% ( p = 0.74) between index cases and genetically related household members. In multivariate analysis, anosmia was more likely to be reported with longer time from symptom onset (OR 1.06 per day [95% CI 1.02 to 1.1]), and with rhinorrhea (OR 2.2 [95% CI 1.6 to 3.0]), or dyspnea (OR 2.4 [95% CI 1.3 to 4.4]). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in anosmia and dysgeusia concordance between genetically related and unrelated household members or non-household controls.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".