Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 508

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Characteristics of Olfactory Disorders in Relation to Major Causes of Olfactory Loss

Temmel, Andreas F. P., Quint, Christian, Schickinger-Fischer, Bettina, Klimek, Ludger, Stoller, Elisabeth, Hummel, Thomas·2002·Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the consequences of olfactory loss and explore specific questions related to the effect of duration of olfactory loss, degree of olfactory sensitivity, and cause of the olfactory loss. PATIENTS: A total of 278 consecutive patients with hyposmia or anosmia were examined. RESULTS: Causes of olfactory loss were categorized as follows: trauma (17%), upper respiratory tract infection (URI) (39%), sinonasal disease (21%), congenital anosmia (3%), idiopathic causes (18%), or other causes (3%). Our data suggest that (1) recovery rate was higher in URI olfactory loss than in olfactory loss from other causes; (2) likelihood of recovery seemed to decrease with increased duration of olfactory loss; and (3) the elderly are more prone to URI olfactory loss than younger patients. Regarding changes in quality of life (QoL), we found that (1) in most patients olfactory loss caused food-related problems; (2) loss in QoL did not change with duration of olfactory loss; (3) younger patients had more complaints than older ones, and women had more complaints than men; (4) complaint scores were higher in hyposmic patients than in anosmic patients; and (5) self-rated depression did not relate to measured olfactory function. CONCLUSIONS: Among many complaints of olfactory loss, the predominant ones were food related. This loss in QoL seemed to be of greater importance in younger than in older people, and women seem to be affected more strongly than men.

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.128.6.635

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 508

Metadata

Authors
Temmel, A. F. P., Quint, C., Schickinger-Fischer, B., Klimek, L., Stoller, E., & Hummel, T.
Venue
Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery
Published
2002-06-01
Volume
128
Issue
6
Pages
635
ISSN
0886-4470 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2109621861
Cited by
508
References
18
FWCI
4.86
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: Characteristics of Olfactory Disorders in Relation to Major Causes of Olfactory Loss. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archotol.128.6.635
The paper
Temmel, A. F. P., Quint, C., Schickinger-Fischer, B., Klimek, L., Stoller, E., & Hummel, T. (2002). Characteristics of Olfactory Disorders in Relation to Major Causes of Olfactory Loss. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.128.6.635

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.