Competitive (but not cooperative) body odors bias the discrimination of action intentions towards cooperation.

Odors help us to interpret the environment, including the nature of social interactions. But, whether and how they influence the ability to discriminate the intentional states embedded in actions is unclear. In two experiments, we asked two independent groups of participants to discriminate motor intentions from videos showing one agent performing a reach-to-grasp movement with another agent with a cooperative or a competitive intent, and the same movement performed alone at either natural- or fast-speed, as controls. Task-irrelevant odor primes preceded each video presentation. Experiment 1 (N = 19) included masked cooperative and competitive body odors (human sweat collected while the donors were engaged in cooperative and competitive activities), whereas Experiment 2 (N = 20) included a common odor (cedarwood oil) and no odor (clean air) as primes. In an odor-primed, two-alternative forced choice task, participants discriminated the intention underlying the observed action. The results indicated that the odor exposure modulated the discrimination speed across different intentions, but only when the action intentions were hard to discriminate (cooperative vs. individual natural-speed, and competitive vs. individual fast-speed). Contrary to our hypothesis, a direct odor-action intention compatibility effect was not found. Instead, we propose a negative arousal compatibility-like effect to explain our results. Discrimination of high arousing action intentions (i.e., competitive) took longer when primed by high arousing odors (common odor and competitive body odor) than by low arousing odors (cooperative body odor and no odor). Discrimination of low arousing action intentions (i.e., cooperative) took longer when primed by low arousing odors than by high arousing odors. All in all, competitive (but not cooperative) body odors bias the discrimination of action intentions towards cooperation.

Effects of genetics on odor perception: Can a quick smell test effectively screen everyone?

SCENTinel, a rapid smell test designed to screen for olfactory disorders, including anosmia (no ability to smell an odor) and parosmia (distorted sense of smell), measures 4 components of olfactory function: detection, intensity, identification, and pleasantness. Each test card contains one of 9 odorant mixtures. Some people born with genetic insensitivities to specific odorants (i.e. specific anosmia) may fail the test if they cannot smell an odorant but otherwise have a normal sense of smell. However, using odorant mixtures has largely been found to prevent this from happening. To better understand whether genetic differences affect SCENTinel test results, we asked genetically informative adult participants (twins or triplets, N = 630; singletons, N = 370) to complete the SCENTinel test. A subset of twins (n = 304) also provided a saliva sample for genotyping. We examined data for differences between the 9 possible SCENTinel odors; effects of age, sex, and race on SCENTinel performance, test-retest variability; and heritability using both structured equation modeling and SNP-based statistical methods. None of these strategies provided evidence for specific anosmia for any of the odors, but ratings of pleasantness were, in part, genetically determined (h2 = 0.40) and were nominally associated with alleles of odorant receptors (e.g. OR2T33 and OR1G1; P < 0.001). These results provide evidence that using odorant mixtures protected against effects of specific anosmia for ratings of intensity but that ratings of pleasantness showed effects of inheritance, possibly informed by olfactory receptor genotypes.

Nature and human well-being: The olfactory pathway.

The world is undergoing massive atmospheric and ecological change, driving unprecedented challenges to human well-being. Olfaction is a key sensory system through which these impacts occur. The sense of smell influences quality of and satisfaction with life, emotion, emotion regulation, cognitive function, social interactions, dietary choices, stress, and depressive symptoms. Exposures via the olfactory pathway can also lead to (anti-)inflammatory outcomes. Increased understanding is needed regarding the ways in which odorants generated by nature (i.e., natural olfactory environments) affect human well-being. With perspectives from a range of health, social, and natural sciences, we provide an overview of this unique sensory system, four consensus statements regarding olfaction and the environment, and a conceptual framework that integrates the olfactory pathway into an understanding of the effects of natural environments on human well-being. We then discuss how this framework can contribute to better accounting of the impacts of policy and land-use decision-making on natural olfactory environments and, in turn, on planetary health.

Using SCENTinel® to predict SARS-CoV-2 infection: insights from a community sample during dominance of Delta and Omicron variants.

Introduction: Based on a large body of previous research suggesting that smell loss was a predictor of COVID-19, we investigated the ability of SCENTinel®, a newly validated rapid olfactory test that assesses odor detection, intensity, and identification, to predict SARS-CoV-2 infection in a community sample. Methods: Between April 5, 2021, and July 5, 2022, 1,979 individuals took one SCENTinel® test, completed at least one physician-ordered SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, and endorsed a list of self-reported symptoms. Results: Among the of SCENTinel® subtests, the self-rated odor intensity score, especially when dichotomized using a previously established threshold, was the strongest predictor of SARS-CoV-2 infection. SCENTinel® had high specificity and negative predictive value, indicating that those who passed SCENTinel® likely did not have a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Predictability of the SCENTinel® performance was stronger when the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant was dominant rather than when the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was dominant. Additionally, SCENTinel® predicted SARS-CoV-2 positivity better than using a self-reported symptom checklist alone. Discussion: These results indicate that SCENTinel® is a rapid assessment tool that can be used for population-level screening to monitor abrupt changes in olfactory function, and to evaluate spread of viral infections like SARS-CoV-2 that often have smell loss as a symptom.

Emotional self-body odors do not influence the access to visual awareness by emotional faces.

A growing body of research suggests that emotional chemosignals in others' body odor (BO), particularly those sampled during fearful states, enhance emotional face perception in conscious and preconscious stages. For instance, emotional faces access visual awareness faster when presented with others' fear BOs. However, the effect of these emotional signals in self-BO, that is, one's own BO, is still neglected in the literature. In the present work, we sought to determine whether emotional self-BOs modify the access to visual awareness of emotional faces. Thirty-eight women underwent a breaking-Continuous Flash Suppression task in which they were asked to detect fearful, happy, and neutral faces, as quickly and accurately as possible, while being exposed to their fear, happiness, and neutral self-BOs. Self-BOs were previously collected and later delivered via an olfactometer, using an event-related design. Results showed a main effect of emotional faces, with happy faces being detected significantly faster than fearful and neutral faces. However, our hypothesis that fear self-BOs would lead to faster emotional face detection was not confirmed, as no effect of emotional self-BOs was found-this was confirmed with Bayesian analysis. Although caution is warranted when interpreting these results, our findings suggest that emotional face perception is not modulated by emotional self-BOs, contrasting with the literature on others' BOs. Further research is needed to understand the role of self-BOs in visual processing and emotion perception.

Text-based predictions of COVID-19 diagnosis from self-reported chemosensory descriptions.

BACKGROUND: There is a prevailing view that humans' capacity to use language to characterize sensations like odors or tastes is poor, providing an unreliable source of information. METHODS: Here, we developed a machine learning method based on Natural Language Processing (NLP) using Large Language Models (LLM) to predict COVID-19 diagnosis solely based on text descriptions of acute changes in chemosensation, i.e., smell, taste and chemesthesis, caused by the disease. The dataset of more than 1500 subjects was obtained from survey responses early in the COVID-19 pandemic, in Spring 2020. RESULTS: When predicting COVID-19 diagnosis, our NLP model performs comparably (AUC ROC ~ 0.65) to models based on self-reported changes in function collected via quantitative rating scales. Further, our NLP model could attribute importance of words when performing the prediction; sentiment and descriptive words such as "smell", "taste", "sense", had strong contributions to the predictions. In addition, adjectives describing specific tastes or smells such as "salty", "sweet", "spicy", and "sour" also contributed considerably to predictions. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the description of perceptual symptoms caused by a viral infection can be used to fine-tune an LLM model to correctly predict and interpret the diagnostic status of a subject. In the future, similar models may have utility for patient verbatims from online health portals or electronic health records.

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, people who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 reported changes in smell and taste. To better study these symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infections and potentially use them to identify infected patients, a survey was undertaken in various countries asking people about their COVID-19 symptoms. One part of the questionnaire asked people to describe the changes in smell and taste they were experiencing. We developed a computational program that could use these responses to correctly distinguish people that had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection from people without SARS-CoV-2 infection. This approach could allow rapid identification of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 from descriptions of their sensory symptoms and be adapted to identify people infected with other viruses in the future.

Covid-19 affects taste independent of taste-smell confusions: results from a combined chemosensory home test and online survey from a large global cohort.

People often confuse smell loss with taste loss, so it is unclear how much gustatory function is reduced in patients self-reporting taste loss. Our pre-registered cross-sectional study design included an online survey in 12 languages with instructions for self-administering chemosensory tests with 10 household items. Between June 2020 and March 2021, 10,953 individuals participated. Of these, 5,225 self-reported a respiratory illness and were grouped based on their reported COVID test results: COVID-positive (COVID+, N = 3,356), COVID-negative (COVID-, N = 602), and COVID unknown for those waiting for a test result (COVID?, N = 1,267). The participants who reported no respiratory illness were grouped by symptoms: sudden smell/taste changes (STC, N = 4,445), other symptoms excluding smell or taste changes (OthS, N = 832), and no symptoms (NoS, N = 416). Taste, smell, and oral irritation intensities and self-assessed abilities were rated on visual analog scales. Compared to the NoS group, COVID+ was associated with a 21% reduction in taste (95% confidence interval (CI): 15-28%), 47% in smell (95% CI: 37-56%), and 17% in oral irritation (95% CI: 10-25%) intensity. There were medium to strong correlations between perceived intensities and self-reported abilities (r = 0.84 for smell, r = 0.68 for taste, and r = 0.37 for oral irritation). Our study demonstrates that COVID-19-positive individuals report taste dysfunction when self-tested with stimuli that have little to none olfactory components. Assessing the smell and taste intensity of household items is a promising, cost-effective screening tool that complements self-reports and may help to disentangle taste loss from smell loss. However, it does not replace standardized validated psychophysical tests.

Low to moderate genetic influences on the rapid smell test SCENTinel™.

SCENTinel™ - a rapid, inexpensive smell test that measures odor detection, intensity, identification, and pleasantness - was developed for population-wide screening of smell function. SCENTinel™ was previously found to screen for multiple types of smell disorders. However, the effect of genetic variability on SCENTinel™ test performance is unknown, which could affect the test's validity. This study assessed performance of SCENTinel™ in a large group of individuals with a normal sense of smell to determine the test-retest reliability and the heritability of SCENTinel™ test performance. One thousand participants (36 [IQR 26-52] years old, 72% female, 80% white) completed a SCENTinel™ test at the 2021 and 2022 Twins Days Festivals in Twinsburg, OH, and 118 of those completed a SCENTinel™ test on each of the festival's two days. Participants comprised 55% percent monozygotic twins, 13% dizygotic twins, 0.4% triplets, and 36% singletons. We found that 97% of participants passed the SCENTinel™ test. Test-retest reliability ranged from 0.57 to 0.71 for SCENTinel™ subtests. Broad-sense heritability, based on 246 monozygotic and 62 dizygotic twin dyads, was low for odor intensity (r=0.03) and moderate for odor pleasantness (r=0.4). Together, this study suggests that SCENTinel™ is a reliable smell test with only moderate heritability effects, which further supports its utility for population-wide screening for smell function.

Science interrupted Our attempt to study disgust sensitivity and the development of political attitudes among children and their parents.

Recent research contends that the behavioral immune system, operating largely outside conscious awareness, motivates individuals to exhibit higher levels of prejudice toward unfamiliar out-groups. This research finds that individual variance in disgust sensitivity correlates with support for political policies that facilitate the avoidance of out-groups. We were interested in developing less intrusive indicators of disgust sensitivity via olfactory measures (i.e., ratings of disgusting odors) and behavioral measures (e.g., willingness to touch disgusting objects) and studying the association between measures of disgust sensitivity and in-group bias among children and adults. We submitted a registered report to conduct this research and received an in-principle acceptance. Unfortunately, unforeseen events impaired our data collection, leaving us with a limited sample (nchildren = 32, nadults = 29) and reducing our ability to draw reliable conclusions from our results. In this essay, we describe our motivation and plan of research, the events that made completing the research impossible, and our preliminary results. In doing so, we hope to offer support for studying the effects of the behavioral immune system, even in ways that we did not originally plan. We conclude with a reflection on the value of registered reports for advancing science.

Proof-of-concept: SCENTinel 1.1 rapidly discriminates COVID-19-related olfactory disorders.

It is estimated that 20%-67% of those with COVID-19 develop olfactory disorders, depending on the SARS-CoV-2 variant. However, there is an absence of quick, population-wide olfactory tests to screen for olfactory disorders. The purpose of this study was to provide a proof-of-concept that SCENTinel 1.1, a rapid, inexpensive, population-wide olfactory test, can discriminate between anosmia (total smell loss), hyposmia (reduced sense of smell), parosmia (distorted odor perception), and phantosmia (odor sensation without a source). Participants were mailed a SCENTinel 1.1 test, which measures odor detection, intensity, identification, and pleasantness, using one of 4 possible odors. Those who completed the test (N = 287) were divided into groups based on their self-reported olfactory function: quantitative olfactory disorder only (anosmia or hyposmia, N = 135), qualitative olfactory disorder only (parosmia and/or phantosmia; N = 86), and normosmia (normal sense of smell; N = 66). SCENTinel 1.1 accurately discriminates quantitative olfactory disorders, qualitative olfactory disorders, and normosmia groups. When olfactory disorders were assessed individually, SCENTinel 1.1 discriminates between hyposmia, parosmia, and anosmia. Participants with parosmia rated common odors less pleasant than those without parosmia. We provide proof-of-concept that SCENTinel 1.1, a rapid smell test, can discriminate quantitative and qualitative olfactory disorders, and is the only direct test to rapidly discriminate parosmia.

Covid-19 affects taste independently of smell: results from a combined chemosensory home test and online survey from a global cohort (N=10,953).

People often confuse smell loss with taste loss, so it is unclear how much gustatory function is reduced in patients self-reporting taste loss. Our pre-registered cross-sectional study design included an online survey in 12 languages with instructions for self-administering chemosensory tests with ten household items. Between June 2020 and March 2021, 10,953 individuals participated. Of these, 3,356 self-reported a positive and 602 a negative COVID-19 diagnosis (COVID+ and COVID-, respectively); 1,267 were awaiting test results (COVID?). The rest reported no respiratory illness and were grouped by symptoms: sudden smell/taste changes (STC, N=4,445), other symptoms excluding smell or taste loss (OthS, N=832), and no symptoms (NoS, N=416). Taste, smell, and oral irritation intensities and self-assessed abilities were rated on visual analog scales. Compared to the NoS group, COVID+ was associated with a 21% reduction in taste (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 15-28%), 47% in smell (95%-CI: 37-56%), and 17% in oral irritation (95%-CI: 10-25%) intensity. In all groups, perceived intensity of smell (r=0.84), taste (r=0.68), and oral irritation (r=0.37) was correlated. Our findings suggest most reports of taste dysfunction with COVID-19 were genuine and not due to misinterpreting smell loss as taste loss (i.e., a classical taste-flavor confusion). Assessing smell and taste intensity of household items is a promising, cost-effective screening tool that complements self-reports and helps to disentangle taste loss from smell loss. However, it does not replace standardized validated psychophysical tests.

Chemosensory Dysfunction in Long-Term COVID-19 Assessed by Self-Reported and Direct Psychophysical Methods.

Chemosensory dysfunction is a frequent postacute sequela of COVID-19. Depending on the type of test used to measure it (self-report vs. direct test), the degree of chemosensory dysfunction in long-term COVID-19 has been found to be highly variable. In this manuscript, we report the cross-sectional data (first assessment) of a longitudinal study (6-month follow-up) examining smell, taste, and chemesthesis in participants affected by long-term COVID-19 (COVID+) and participants without COVID-19 (COVID-) by means of both self-reported and direct psychophysical methods. In total, 208 Italian participants (COVID+ n = 133; COVID- n = 75) completed the Smell and Taste Check developed by the Global Consortium for Chemosensory Research (GCCR), which includes self-reports on smell, taste, and chemesthetic abilities as well as direct intensity ratings of unstandardized smell, taste, and chemesthetic household items. Furthermore, all participants completed SCENTinel, a validated direct smell test. We found a positive association between the self-reported, unstandardized direct test and the validated direct test for smell, indicating moderate to large agreement across measures. Furthermore, the performance on SCENTinel was significantly associated with self-reported smell loss. A positive association between the self-reports and the intensity of household items was also retrieved for taste and chemesthesis. The time relative to COVID-19 onset (267.3 ± 113.9 days) did not modulate the chemosensory performance of self-reported abilities, intensity ratings, and SCENTinel. All in all, we confirm the impairment of three chemical senses (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) in an independent sample of Italian participants affected by long-term COVID-19 by using and comparing self-reported and direct psychophysical methods. We contribute to the discussion on best practices to monitor chemosensory dysfunction in individuals affected by long-term COVID-19.

Proof-of-concept: SCENTinel 1.1 rapidly discriminates COVID-19 related olfactory disorders.

It is estimated that 20-67% of those with COVID-19 develop olfactory disorders, depending on the SARS-CoV-2 variant. However, there is an absence of quick, population-wide olfactory tests to screen for olfactory disorders. The purpose of this study was to provide a proof-of-concept that SCENTinel 1.1, a rapid, inexpensive, population-wide olfactory test, can discriminate between anosmia (total smell loss), hyposmia (reduced sense of smell), parosmia (distorted odor perception), and phantosmia (odor sensation without a source). Participants were mailed a SCENTinel 1.1 test, which measures odor detection, intensity, identification, and pleasantness, using one of four possible odors. Those who completed the test (N = 381) were divided into groups based on their self-reported olfactory function: quantitative olfactory disorder (anosmia or hyposmia, N = 135), qualitative olfactory disorder (parosmia and/or phantosmia; N = 86), and normosmia (normal sense of smell; N = 66). SCENTinel 1.1 accurately discriminates quantitative olfactory disorders, qualitative olfactory disorders, and normosmia groups. When olfactory disorders were assessed individually, SCENTinel 1.1 discriminates between hyposmia, parosmia and anosmia. Participants with parosmia rated common odors less pleasant than those without parosmia. We provide proof-of-concept that SCENTinel 1.1, a rapid smell test, can discriminate quantitative and qualitative olfactory disorders, and is the only direct test to rapidly discriminate parosmia.

The Effects of Persistent Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunctions on Quality of Life in Long-COVID-19 Patients.

(1) Background: Persistent olfactory (POD) and gustatory (PGD) dysfunctions are one of the most frequent symptoms of long-Coronavirus Disease 2019 but their effect on the quality of life (QoL) of patients is still largely unexplored. (2) Methods: An online survey was administered to individuals who reported to have had SARS-CoV-2 infection at least 6 months prior with persisting COVID-19 symptoms (using the COVID symptom index), including ratings of POD and PGD, and their physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) components of quality of life were assessed using the standardized short form 12 questionnaire (SF-12). (3) Results: Responses from 431 unique individuals were included in the analyses. The most frequent persistent symptoms were: fatigue (185 cases, 42.9%), olfactory dysfunction (127 cases, 29.5%), gustatory dysfunction (96 cases, 22.3%) and muscle pain (83 cases, 19.3%). Respondents who reported persisting muscle pain, joint pain, fatigue, headache, gastrointestinal disturbances, and dyspnea had significantly worse PCS. Those experiencing persistent fatigue and dyspnea also showed significantly lower MCS. Respondents reporting POD or PGD showed significantly worse QoL, but only pertaining to the MCS. Multiple regressions predicted MCS based on olfactory and marginally on gustatory ratings, but not PCS. Age significantly affected the prediction of PCS but not MCS, and gender and temporal distance from the COVID-19 diagnosis had no effect. (4) Conclusions: POD and PGD are frequent symptoms of the long-COVID-19 syndrome and significantly reduce QoL, specifically in the mental health component. This evidence should stimulate the establishment of appropriate infrastructure to support individuals with persistent CD, while research on effective therapies scales up.

Correlation between olfactory function, age, sex, and cognitive reserve index in the Italian population.

PURPOSE: Loss of smell decreases the quality of life and contributes to the failure in recognizing hazardous substances. Given the relevance of olfaction in daily life, it is important to recognize an undiagnosed olfactory dysfunction to prevent these possible complications. Up to now, the prevalence of smell disorders in Italy is unknown due to a lack of epidemiological studies. Hence, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in a sample of Italian adults. METHODS: Six hundred and thirty-three participants (347 woman and 286 men; mean age 44.9 years, SD 17.3, age range 18-86) were recruited from 10 distinct Italian regions. Participants were recruited using a convenience sapling and were divided into six different age groups: 18-29 years (N = 157), 30-39 years (N = 129), 40-49 years (N = 99), 50-59 years (N = 106), > 60 years (N = 142). Olfactory function, cognitive abilities, cognitive reserve, and depression were assessed, respectively, with: Sniffin' Sticks 16-item Odor Identification Test, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Cognitive Reserve Index, and the Beck Depression Inventory. Additionally, socio-demographic data, medical history, and health-related lifestyle information were collected. RESULTS: About 27% of participants showed an odor identification score < 12 indicating hyposmia. Multiple regression analysis revealed that OI was significantly correlated with age, sex, and cognitive reserve index, and young women with high cognitive reserve index showing the highest olfactory scores. CONCLUSION: This study provides data on the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in different Italian regions.

Assessing the extent and timing of chemosensory impairments during COVID-19 pandemic.

Chemosensory impairments have been established as a specific indicator of COVID-19. They affect most patients and may persist long past the resolution of respiratory symptoms, representing an unprecedented medical challenge. Since the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic started, we now know much more about smell, taste, and chemesthesis loss associated with COVID-19. However, the temporal dynamics and characteristics of recovery are still unknown. Here, capitalizing on data from the Global Consortium for Chemosensory Research (GCCR) crowdsourced survey, we assessed chemosensory abilities after the resolution of respiratory symptoms in participants diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in Italy. This analysis led to the identification of two patterns of chemosensory recovery, partial and substantial, which were found to be associated with differential age, degrees of chemosensory loss, and regional patterns. Uncovering the self-reported phenomenology of recovery from smell, taste, and chemesthetic disorders is the first, yet essential step, to provide healthcare professionals with the tools to take purposeful and targeted action to address chemosensory disorders and their severe discomfort.

Olfactory influences on reach-to-press movements in a stop-signal task.

Response inhibition is sensitive to unexpected changes in the environment triggered by emotional stimuli. Whereas the impact of visual material on inhibition has been widely documented, the attention on the influence of olfactory stimuli has been neglected. Here, we examined the effect of pleasant (orange), unpleasant (trimethyloxazole), and control (clean air) odour primes in a stop-signal task. Twenty-five participants had to elicit or inhibit reach-to-press actions which allowed to examine the olfactory influences on both the planning (release phase) and the on-line control (reaching phase) of responses. Additionally, we manipulated the distance between the initial hand position and the target to be pressed (10 vs. 20 vs. 30 cm). The pleasant (vs. control) odour impaired inhibition, as reflected in slower stop-signal reaction times and higher release errors, indicating greater mobilisation of inhibitory resources by pleasant stimuli. Further, faster release responses were triggered by pleasant and unpleasant primes, supporting the idea of perceptual prioritisation of emotional (vs. non-emotional) stimuli. The olfactory manipulation did not affect the reaching phase of the responses. Instead, the distance manipulation modulated the reaching but not the release phase. These results extend the sparse literature on the influences of odour stimuli on response inhibition.

From loss to recovery: how to effectively assess chemosensory impairments during COVID-19 pandemic.

Chemosensory impairments have been established as a specific indicator of COVID-19. They affect most patients and may persist long past the resolution of respiratory symptoms, representing an unprecedented medical challenge. Since the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic started, we now know much more about smell, taste, and chemesthesis loss associated with COVID-19. However, the temporal dynamics and characteristics of recovery are still unknown. Here, capitalizing on data from the Global Consortium for Chemosensory Research (GCCR) crowdsourced survey, we assessed chemosensory abilities after the resolution of respiratory symptoms in participants diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in Italy. This analysis led to the identification of two patterns of chemosensory recovery, limited (partial) and substantial, which were found to be associated with differential age, degrees of chemosensory loss, and regional patterns. Uncovering the self-reported phenomenology of recovery from smell, taste, and chemesthetic disorders is the first, yet essential step, to provide healthcare professionals with the tools to take purposeful and targeted action to address chemosensory disorders and its severe discomfort.

SCENTinel 1.0: Development of a Rapid Test to Screen for Smell Loss.

Commercially available smell tests are primarily used in research or in-depth clinical evaluations and are too costly and time-consuming for population surveillance in health emergencies like COVID-19. To address this need, we developed the SCENTinel 1.0 test, which rapidly evaluates 3 olfactory functions: detection, intensity, and identification. We tested whether self-administering the SCENTinel 1.0 test discriminates between individuals with self-reported smell loss and those with average smell ability (normosmic individuals) and provides performance comparable to the validated and standardized NIH Toolbox Odor Identification Test in normosmic individuals. Using Bayesian linear models and prognostic classification algorithms, we compared the SCENTinel 1.0 performance of a group of self-reported anosmic individuals (N = 111, 47 ± 13 years old, F = 71%) and normosmic individuals (N = 154, 47 ± 14 years old, F = 74%) as well as individuals reporting other smell disorders (such as hyposmia or parosmia; N = 42, 55 ± 10 years old, F = 67%). Ninety-four percent of normosmic individuals met our SCENTinel 1.0 accuracy criteria compared with only 10% of anosmic individuals and 64% of individuals with other smell disorders. Overall performance on SCENTinel 1.0 predicted belonging to the normosmic group better than identification or detection alone (vs. anosmic: AUC = 0.95, specificity = 0.94). Odor intensity provided the best single-feature predictor to classify normosmic individuals. Among normosmic individuals, 92% met the accuracy criteria at both SCENTinel 1.0 and the NIH Toolbox Odor Identification Test. SCENTinel 1.0 is a practical test able to discriminate individuals with smell loss and will likely be useful in many clinical situations, including COVID-19 symptom screening.