A Pilot Study of the Computerized Brief Smell Identification Test

0Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: A self-administered Computerized Brief Smell Identification Test (cB-SIT) was developed recently to perform the olfactory identification test under computer control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical applicability of the cB-SIT as compared with the traditional Brief Smell Identification Test (B-SIT). Methods: Sixty healthy volunteers with self-reported normal olfactory function, 30 hyposmic patients, and 30 anosmic patients were enrolled from June 2023 to May 2024. All enrolled participants received both B-SIT and cB-SIT in a random order to measure their odor identification ability. Thirty healthy volunteers took the second B-SIT and cB-SIT at least one week later. Results: The score was significantly different in both B-SIT and cB-SIT among healthy volunteers, hyposmic, and anosmic patients. The correct answer rate was significantly different in 10 items of the B-SIT and in 7 items of the cB-SIT among the three groups, but the post hoc test showed significant differences in correct answer rates between healthy volunteers and hyposmic patients in 7 items of both the B-SIT and cB-SIT. Test–retest results showed the score of the second B-SIT test was significantly higher than that of the first test, but the scores of the two tests of the cB-SIT were not significantly different. In the B-SIT, the lemon odorant had a higher correct answer rate in the second test than in the first test, but in the cB-SIT, the correct answer rate was not significantly different between the first and second tests in all 12 items. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that the cB-SIT was similar to the B-SIT and can be administered in the diagnosis of patients with olfactory dysfunction.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jiang, R. S., & Chiang, Y. F. (2024). A Pilot Study of the Computerized Brief Smell Identification Test. Diagnostics, 14(19). https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14192121

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free