Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40443794›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2025

Diagnostic value of olfactory function testing for Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yuxuan Liu, Yunpeng Cao, Hongquan Wei

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Subjective and objective olfactory dysfunction and its screening value in patients with subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's dementia.Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Olfactory Dysfunction and Cognitive Decline: Are They Related?Current allergy and asthma reports · 2025
    Review
  7. 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

3 authors.

Yuxuan LiuDepartment of Otolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Yunpeng CaoDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Hongquan WeiDepartment of Otolaryngology, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is clinically classified into prodromal (asymptomatic), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to AD, and dementia due to AD. This study investigates the diagnostic value of olfactory function testing for AD and MCI. Methods: Systematic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were conducted up to February 1, 2024. Methodological quality was assessed using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Effect sizes were combined using a random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird method), and statistical analyses were conducted using STATA 15.1 and Meta-Disc 1.4 software. Results: Twenty-five studies with 13,611 participants were included. For diagnosing AD, combined sensitivity (SE) was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.71-0.85), specificity (SP) was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69-0.84), and AUC was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88). For MCI, SE was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.54-0.78), SP was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.71-0.86), and AUC was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77-0.84). Combined SE and SP for diagnosing AD and MCI were 0.58 (95% CI: 0.46-0.68) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78-0.93), with an AUC of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74-0.82). SE and SP for AD or MCI were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.36-0.98) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.82-0.98), with an AUC of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.98). Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that olfactory function testing, as a simple, non-invasive, and cost-effective assessment method, demonstrates high diagnostic efficacy in the early identification of AD and MCI, showing promising clinical application. Systematic review registration: CRD42024520871.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseasediagnosismild cognitive impairmentolfactory disorderolfactory function testing

Identifiers

PMID40443794
PMCPMC12119486

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.