Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 174

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Olfactory Function in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease: An Investigation Using Psychophysical and Electrophysiological Techniques

Peters, Jürgen M., Hummel, Thomas, Kratzsch, Tilman, Lötsch, Jörn, Skarke, Carsten, Frölich, Lutz·2003·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To clarify the olfactory deficit hypothesis regarding Alzheimer's disease, the authors compared olfactory function in patients with Alzheimer's disease, subjects with mild cognitive impairment, and healthy comparison subjects. METHOD: Olfactory function of 14 patients with mild Alzheimer's disease, eight subjects with mild cognitive impairment, and eight healthy age-matched comparison subjects was assessed with both psychophysical tests and olfactory event-related potentials. RESULTS: Group comparison of the psychophysical test results showed a significant main effect of diagnosis for odor detection threshold, odor discrimination, and odor identification. These results correlated only partially with those obtained from olfactory event-related potentials. Seven Alzheimer's disease patients and four with mild cognitive impairment showed no olfactory event-related potentials, suggesting hyposmia, while all comparison subjects had clearly discernible responses. Patients with Alzheimer's disease were significantly more likely to be nonresponders. In the four Alzheimer's disease patients and four subjects with mild cognitive impairment who had clear electrophysiological responses, amplitudes and latencies of the various event-related potential components were normal, i.e., similar to those of the comparison subjects, although 12 of the 14 Alzheimer's disease patients and seven of the eight mildly impaired subjects were classified as functionally anosmic with psychophysical methods. CONCLUSIONS: The electrophysiological results confirm prior findings of olfactory dysfunction in patients with Alzheimer's disease and preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Investigations of larger study groups with detailed cognitive examination and postmortem diagnosis may resolve the intriguing possibility of early diagnosis and discrimination of Alzheimer's disease subtypes through chemosensory event-related potentials in addition to existing biomarkers.

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 · 10.1176/appi.ajp.160.11.1995

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 174

Metadata

Authors
Peters, J. M., Hummel, T., Kratzsch, T., Lötsch, J., Skarke, C., & Frölich, L.
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2003-11-01
Volume
160
Issue
11
Pages
1995-2002
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2141073802
Cited by
174
References
3
FWCI
3.43
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 Function in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease: An Investigation Using Psychophysical and Electrophysiological Techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.11.1995
The paper
Peters, J. M., Hummel, T., Kratzsch, T., Lötsch, J., Skarke, C., & Frölich, L. (2003). Olfactory Function in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease: An Investigation Using Psychophysical and Electrophysiological Techniques. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.11.1995

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.