ArticleFrontiers in neural circuits2025
Long-term self-reported symptoms and psychophysical tests in COVID-19 subjects experiencing persistent olfactory dysfunction: a 4-year follow-up study.
Article in Frontiers in neural circuits, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The APOLLO trial: a proof-of-concept study for vitamin A nasal drops in COVID-19-related postinfectious olfactory dysfunction.Chemical senses · 2026Trial
- Olfactory Training for COVID-19-Related Olfactory Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
- Symptom Trajectories and Long-Term Sequelae of COVID-19: A Matched Case-Control Study with Population-Based Controls.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- One-year longitudinal cohort study of chemosensory recovery and plasma biomarker dynamics in SARS-CoV-2 survivors.Scientific reports · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, chemosensory dysfunction (CD), including olfactory and taste quantitative dysfunction (OD/TD), has emerged as a prevalent and early symptom in SARS-CoV-2-infected subjects. This study explores the prevalence, duration, and recovery trajectory of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction (C19OD), with a specific focus on the four-year follow-up. Methods: Using a combination of psychophysical tests (Sniffin' sticks) and patient-reported outcome measures (sVAS and tVAS), 83 participants were prospectively evaluated for OD and parosmia. Factors influencing long-term olfactory recovery were analysed. Results: Baseline assessments revealed OD in 56.6% of patients, with progressive improvement observed over 4 years. At the four-year follow-up, 92.3% of patients recovered their olfaction while the remaining still reported hyposmia. Younger age and olfactory training were found to be favourable prognostic factors. Conclusion: Our findings show that, despite most individuals with C19OD recover olfaction within the first year, a subset of them continue to experience prolonged CD, demonstrating a slow, constant and meaningful improvement over years. This prolonged recovery period highlights the complexity of SARS-CoV-2's impact on olfactory function and highlights the need of further research on CD pathophysiology with the aim to improve therapeutic approaches to C19OD.
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.