Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 488

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Impact of Olfactory Impairment on Quality of Life and Disability

Miwa, Takaki, Furukawa, Mitsuru, Tsukatani, Toshiaki, Costanzo, Richard M., DiNardo, Laurence J., Reiter, Evan R.·2001·Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether olfactory loss affects patients' quality of life or level of disability. DESIGN: Retrospective survey using questionnaire data and clinic database review. SETTING: Two university medical center smell and taste clinics. PATIENTS: A total of 1407 patients were tested for smell and taste disturbances from 1984 through 1998. Surveys were mailed to 1093 patients who had abnormal test scores; 420 (38.4%) returned completed surveys. Patients were grouped by self-rated ability to smell as "impaired" (those reporting persisting deficits) or "improved" (those reporting no smell problem when surveyed). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response frequencies were compared between the 2 groups for questions regarding ability to perform common activities of daily living and quality-of-life issues. RESULTS: Mean (+/-SD) number of activities of daily living affected by olfactory loss was 4.70 +/- 3.56 for the impaired group and 0.61 +/- 1.58 for the improved group (P < .001). Among specific activities, the most common cited impairments were ability to detect spoiled food (impaired vs improved groups, 75% vs 12%; P < .001), gas leaks (61% vs 8%; P < .001), or smoke (50% vs 1%; P < .001); eating (53% vs 12%; P < .001); and cooking (49% vs 12%; P < .001). Differences in quality-of-life issues were reported primarily in the areas of safety and eating. Overall satisfaction with life was reported by 87% of the improved group but only 50% of the impaired group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients reporting persistent olfactory impairment after previously documented olfactory loss indicate a higher level of disability and lower quality of life than those with perceived resolution of olfactory compromise.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archotol.127.5.497

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 488

Metadata

Authors
Miwa, T., Furukawa, M., Tsukatani, T., Costanzo, R. M., DiNardo, L. J., & Reiter, E. R.
Venue
Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery
Published
2001-05-01
Volume
127
Issue
5
Pages
497
ISSN
0886-4470 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2134695358
Cited by
488
References
0
FWCI
2.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of Olfactory Impairment on Quality of Life and Disability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archotol.127.5.497
The paper
Miwa, T., Furukawa, M., Tsukatani, T., Costanzo, R. M., DiNardo, L. J., & Reiter, E. R. (2001). Impact of Olfactory Impairment on Quality of Life and Disability. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.127.5.497

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.