| Title |
Changes of olfactory abilities in relation to age: odor identification in more than 1400 people aged 4 to 80 years
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-014-3263-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Sorokowska, V. A. Schriever, V. Gudziol, C. Hummel, A. Hähner, E. Iannilli, C. Sinding, M. Aziz, H. S. Seo, S. Negoias, T. Hummel |
| Abstract |
The currently presented large dataset (n = 1,422) consists of results that have been assembled over the last 8 years at science fairs using the 16-item odor identification part of the "Sniffin' Sticks". In this context, the focus was on olfactory function in children; in addition before testing, we asked participants to rate their olfactory abilities and the patency of the nasal airways. We reinvestigated some simple questions, e.g., differences in olfactory odor identification abilities in relation to age, sex, self-ratings of olfactory function and nasal patency. Three major results evolved: first, consistent with previously published reports, we found that identification scores of the youngest and the oldest participants were lower than the scores obtained by people aged 20-60. Second, we observed an age-related increase in the olfactory abilities of children. Moreover, the self-assessed olfactory abilities were related to actual performance in the smell test, but only in adults, and self-assessed nasal patency was not related to the "Sniffin' Sticks" identification score. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Qatar | 1 | 20% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 140 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 13% |
| Researcher | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 35 | 25% |
| Unknown | 32 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 20% |
| Psychology | 19 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 12% |
| Unknown | 43 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,490,303
of 25,364,653 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#47
of 3,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,763
of 258,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#2
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,364,653 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,425 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 258,083 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.