International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Olfaction
Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Contributed › peer-review
Contributors
- Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery
- Stanford Medicine
- American Academy of Otolaryngology
- Vanderbilt School of Medicine
- University of Pittsburgh
- Harvard Medical School (HMS)
- Biruni Universitesi
- State University of Campinas
- Virginia Commonwealth University
- Psychology and Psychosomatic Medicine
- Associazione Naso Sano
- University of Connecticut
- Duke University
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUMC)
- University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden
- University of Louisville
- London Bridge Hospital
- Navamindradhiraj University
- Feinberg School of Medicine
- Mie University
- The University of Tokyo
- Johns Hopkins Medicine
- University of Vermont Medical Center
- Emory University
- Thomas Jefferson University
- University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
- Kanazawa Medical University
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine
- Medical University of Vienna
- Massachusetts General Hospital
- University of East Anglia
- The University of Chicago
- Medical University of South Carolina
- Tufts University
- University of Cincinnati
- Oregon Health and Science University
- Western University
- University College London
- Barts Health NHS Trust
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O).
METHODS: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review, or evidence-based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus.
RESULTS: The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies.
CONCLUSION: This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.
Details
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 327-680 |
Number of pages | 354 |
Journal | International forum of allergy & rhinology |
Volume | 2022 |
Issue number | 12(4) |
Publication status | Published - 1 Apr 2022 |
Peer-reviewed | Yes |
External IDs
Scopus | 85127480132 |
---|---|
unpaywall | 10.1002/alr.22929 |
Mendeley | bdb6cfbf-1411-3e4d-a1c4-2f2c5baaf510 |
ORCID | /0000-0001-9713-0183/work/146645236 |
ORCID | /0000-0003-1311-8000/work/158767505 |
Keywords
Keywords
- Consensus, Cost of Illness, Humans, Hypersensitivity, Smell, phantosmia, loss of smell, olfaction, olfactory dysfunction, systematic review, olfactory loss, anosmia, parosmia, evidence-based medicine, hyposmia