You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Association of Helicobacter pylori infection with olfactory function using smell identification screening test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-017-4656-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Selin Üstün Bezgin, Taliye Çakabay, Kader Irak, Murat Koçyiğit, Bilge Serin Keskineğe, Raşit Cevizci, Yıldırım Ahmet Bayazıt |
| Abstract |
The aim of the present study is to investigate the role of Helicobacter pylori in olfactory function. Thirty-six patients (mean age 38.5) aged between 18 and 55 years who were diagnosed with H. pylori by gastric biopsies and age- and sex-matched 30 healthy adults (mean age 33.6) were included in the study. All participants underwent a detailed ear-nose-throat examination including endoscopic examination of the nasal cavity and laryngeal area, and olfactory tests were performed using the Sniffin' Sticks, a 12-item screening test (Sniffin'Sticks; Burghart, Wedel, Germany) and odor scores were recorded. The mean odor score was 7.9 ± 1.7 (range 2-10) in the patient group and 10.3 ± 1.4 (range 6-12) in the control group. There were significant lower scores in the patient group compared to the control group (p < 0.05). In conclusion, it is apparent that there is an association of H. pylori infection with olfactory dysfunction. H. pylori infection should be considered as possible etiological factors in patients with olfactory dysfunction. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Professor | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 50% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 May 2018.
All research outputs
#16,205,046
of 24,849,927 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#1,173
of 3,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,532
of 320,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#11
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,849,927 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,319 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 320,833 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.