| Title |
Olfactory functioning in early multiple sclerosis: Sniffin’ Sticks Test study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s116195 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hale Z Batur Caglayan, Ceyla Irkec, Bijen Nazliel, Aslı Akyol Gurses, Irem Capraz |
| Abstract |
Previous studies have shown that olfactory functioning is affected by multiple sclerosis (MS). This study assessed the level of the olfactory impairment in early MS by using the Sniffin' Sticks Test. This study included 30 patients with MS and 30 healthy controls. We collected demographic and clinical data from participants and administered the Sniffin' Sticks Test. We found no differences between the MS and control groups in odor discrimination, odor identification, and threshold discrimination identification scores, but odor threshold (OT) scores were higher in the control group than in the MS group (P=0.49). In addition, we did not find any correlation between MS patients' olfactory test scores and their scores on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), disease duration, history of optic neuritis, or being on immunomodulatory therapy. In recent studies, odor threshold impairment seemed to be the most striking finding in patients with MS. Although the present study found a mild alteration in odor threshold, olfactory dysfunction appears to be a consequence of neurodegeneration in the higher order olfactory brain regions, which is thought to be a time-dependent process. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 24% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,420
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,647
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#52
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.