The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Olfactory training is helpful in postinfectious olfactory loss: A randomized, controlled, multicenter study
Abstract
Objectives/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of olfactory training (OT) on olfactory function in patients with persistent postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD). Study Design: Randomized, single‐blind, controlled, multicenter crossover study. Methods: Twelve tertiary university medical centers participated. Investigations were performed at three visits (baseline, after 18 weeks, and after 36 weeks), including only subjects with PIOD of <24‐months duration. At each visit, participants received detailed assessment of olfactory function. Seventy subjects trained with high concentrations of four odors for 18 weeks; the other half (n = 74) trained with low concentrations of odors. For the following 18 weeks this regimen was switched. Results: After 18 weeks, olfactory function improved in the high‐training group in 18 of 70 participants (26%), whereas only 11/74 improved in the low‐training group (15%). In subjects with a duration of olfactory dysfunction of <12 months, olfactory function improved in 15/24 participants (63%) of the high‐training group and in 6/31 participants (19%) of the low‐training group (P = .03). Conclusions: OT improves PIOD, and the use of odors at higher concentrations is beneficial to improvement. OT is a safe procedure and appears to be particularly useful in patients who start OT within 12 months after the onset of the disorder. OT is the first successful therapy regime in patients with PIOD. Level of Evidence: 1b. Laryngoscope, 124:826–831, 2014
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Statistical power analyses using G∗Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.41.4.1149 · Cited by 37,615
Deems, D. A., Doty, R. L., Settle, R. G., Moore-Gillon, V., Shaman, P., Mester, A. F., Kimmelman, C. P., Brightman, V. J., & Snow, J. B. (1991) · Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/archotol.1991.01870170065015 · Cited by 1,023
Effects of olfactory training in patients with olfactory loss
Hummel, T., Rissom, K., Reden, J., Hähner, A., Weidenbecher, M., & Hüttenbrink, K. (2009) · The Laryngoscope · doi:10.1002/lary.20101 · Cited by 622
Self-citationA Study on the Frequency of Olfactory Dysfunction
Landis, B. N., Konnerth, C. G., & Hummel, T. (2004) · The Laryngoscope · doi:10.1097/00005537-200410000-00017 · Cited by 474
Self-citationReden, J., Mueller, A., Mueller, C. A., Konstantinidis, I., Frasnelli, J., Landis, B. N., & Hummel, T. R. (2006) · Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/archotol.132.3.265 · Cited by 249
Self-citationInfluence of training and experience on the perception of multicomponent odor mixtures.
Livermore, A., & Laing, D. G. (1996) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.22.2.267 · Cited by 233
Seiden, A. M. (2004) · Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.otc.2004.06.007 · Cited by 228
Induction of Olfactory Receptor Sensitivity in Mice
Wang, H.-W., Wysocki, C. J., & Gold, G. H. (1993) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.8493539 · Cited by 197
Riechstörungen: Epidemiologie und Therapie in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz
Damm, M., Temmel, A. F. P., Welge–Lüssen, A., Eckel, H. E., Kreft, M.-P., Klußmann, J. P., Gudziol, H., Hüttenbrink, K. B., & Hummel, T. R. (2004) · HNO · doi:10.1007/s00106-003-0877-z · Cited by 171
Self-citationLong-term Follow-up of Olfactory Loss Secondary to Head Trauma and Upper Respiratory Tract Infection
Duncan, H. J., & Seiden, A. M. (1995) · Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/archotol.1995.01890100087015 · Cited by 161
Cited by
Postinfectious olfactory loss: A retrospective study on 791 patients
Cavazzana, A., Larsson, M., Münch, M., Hähner, A., & Hummel, T. (2018) · The Laryngoscope · doi:10.1002/lary.26606 · Cited by 109
Self-citationWine experts’ recognition of wine odors is not verbally mediated
Croijmans, I., Arshamian, A., Speed, L. J., & Majid, A. (2021) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000949 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Damm, M., Pikart, L. K., Reimann, H., Burkert, S., Göktas, Ö., Haxel, B., Frey, S., Charalampakis, I., Beule, A., Renner, B., Hummel, T., & Hüttenbrink, K.
- Venue
- The Laryngoscope
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-09-19
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 826-831
- ISSN
- 0023-852X (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4995
- OpenAlex
- W2169282365
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 6.99
- 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: Olfactory training is helpful in postinfectious olfactory loss: A randomized, controlled, multicenter study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/lary.24340
- The paper
- Damm, M., Pikart, L. K., Reimann, H., Burkert, S., Göktas, Ö., Haxel, B., Frey, S., Charalampakis, I., Beule, A., Renner, B., Hummel, T., & Hüttenbrink, K. (2014). Olfactory training is helpful in postinfectious olfactory loss: A randomized, controlled, multicenter study. The Laryngoscope. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24340
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.