SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
The effectiveness of olfactory training for chronic olfactory disorder following COVID-19: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Olfactory Training in COVID-19 Related Olfactory Dysfunction-A Placebo-Controlled Trial.The Laryngoscope · 2025Trial
- Optimizing Odorants for Olfactory Training Based on Olfactory Receptor-Ligand Pair Analysis.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic olfactory disorders are some of the most frequent post-COVID-19 presentations. Olfactory training (OT) is currently the most popular method used for treating post-viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD). We evaluated the effect of olfactory training on the chronic olfactory disorders of patients infected with COVID-19. Methodology: A systematic literature search was performed per PRISMA guidelines in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and the Cochrane Library. Only patients with chronic olfactory disorders of 30 days or more were included. The primary outcome was the olfactory score at the end of follow-up. In all studies, improvement was defined as a positive change over time in the results of objective psychophysical olfactory tests. The most commonly used test was the Sniffin' Sticks. Typically, outcome measures involved comparing the mean olfactory scores. In the Sniffin' Sticks test, an improvement was also indicated by a change of 5.5 points or more in the Threshold, Discrimination, and Identification scores. Results: Fourteen studies (1.596 participants) were included in this review. Among the included studies, up to 10 were RCTs. Nine studies assessed the combined effects of adjuvant therapy and olfactory training, while five studies assessed only OT. Conclusions: In our assessment, olfactory training alone produces significant improvements in chronic olfactory dysfunctions. However, a combined therapy approach is essential to achieve more effective outcomes. Integrating olfactory training with adjuvants like CoUltraPEALut, Cerebrolysin, and oral Vitamin A has demonstrated substantial benefits in enhancing post-COVID-19 olfactory function. Strict adherence to the OT protocol and extending the duration of OT to 3 months or more significantly enhance treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.