Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38855291›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery2024

Recovery rates and long-term olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection.

Melanie Dias, Zara Shaida, Nora Haloob, Claire Hopkins

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Nasal cytological evidence of chronic inflammation in the olfactory cleft in post-viral olfactory dysfunction.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 · 2025
    Observational
  9. Article
  10. Recovery rates and long-term olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Melanie DiasENT Department Guy's Hospital London UK.
Zara ShaidaENT Department Guy's Hospital London UK.
Nora HaloobENT Department Guy's Hospital London UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8487-4925
Claire HopkinsENT Department Guy's Hospital London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3993-1569

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Olfactory dysfunction is one of the most recognized symptoms of COVID-19, significantly impacting quality of life, particularly in cases where recovery is prolonged. This review aims to explore patterns of olfactory recovery post-COVID-19 infection, with particular focus on delayed recovery. Data Sources: Published literature in the English language, including senior author's own work, online and social media platforms, and patients' anecdotal reports. Method: A comprehensive review of the literature was undertaken by the authors with guidance from the senior author with expertise in the field of olfaction. Results: Based on self-report, an estimated 95% of patients recover their olfactory function within 6 months post-COVID-19 infection. However, psychophysical testing detects higher rates of persistent olfactory dysfunction. Recovery has been found to continue for at least 2 years postinfection; negative prognostic indicators include severe olfactory loss in the acute phase, female sex, and older age. Variability in quantitative and qualitative disturbance in prolonged cases likely reflects both peripheral and central pathophysiological mechanisms. Limitations of many of the reviewed studies reflect lack of psychophysical testing and baseline olfactory assessment. Conclusions: Post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction remains a significant health and psychosocial burden. Emerging evidence is improving awareness and knowledge among clinicians to better support patients through their olfactory rehabilitation, with hope of recovery after several months or years. Further research is needed to better understand the underlying pathogenesis of delayed recovery, identify at risk individuals earlier in the disease course, and develop therapeutic targets.

Indexed as

anosmiaCOVID‐19olfactionparosmiarecovery

Identifiers

PMID38855291
PMCPMC11156684

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.