↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of taste disorders

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Characteristics of taste disorders
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, December 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00405-012-2310-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. Fark, C. Hummel, A. Hähner, T. Nin, T. Hummel

Abstract

Aim of this retrospective study was to obtain information about the frequency of taste disorders, their most frequent causes, and typical symptoms. A total of 491 out of 4,680 patients (presenting for the first time between 1998 and 2011) exhibited taste disorders (10.5 %). All patients underwent a thorough physical otorhinolaryngological examination including detailed assessment of smell and taste functions. The three most frequent causes of disorders were idiopathic (34 %), posttraumatic (24 %), and postoperative (15 %). Patients with idiopathic and postoperative taste disorders complained mainly about hypogeusia and parageusia; in comparison, patients with posttraumatic taste disorders exhibited a relatively higher degree of partial, local, or complete ageusia. Among patients with phantogeusia and parageusia, 38 % reported salty, and 22 % mixed sensations like bitter-salty or sour-sweet. In approximately 1/3 of this group of patients the cause of dysgeusia is unknown. Twenty-one percent of the patients complained of qualitative rather than quantitative taste problems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 108 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 20%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 31 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Psychology 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 34 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2020.
All research outputs
#7,310,239
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#445
of 3,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,754
of 292,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#4
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,711 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 292,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.