嗅探棒心理物理测试在英国的文化适应性和有效性

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 Neuroscience Chemosensory Perception Pub Date : 2021-06-19 DOI:10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2
Lorna Langstaff, Allan Clark, Mahmoud Salam, Carl M. Philpott
{"title":"嗅探棒心理物理测试在英国的文化适应性和有效性","authors":"Lorna Langstaff,&nbsp;Allan Clark,&nbsp;Mahmoud Salam,&nbsp;Carl M. Philpott","doi":"10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Olfactory testing must be culturally adapted to be relevant to the target population. This study aimed to validate the Sniffin’ Sticks test for the UK setting.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cohort study was conducted at a tertiary olfactory dysfunction clinic. Phase 1—healthy volunteers underwent the original German identification test followed by a UK adapted version. Phase 2—patients with olfactory dysfunction underwent the extended smell test (TDI) including the new descriptors. Outcome measures included differences in identification test (phase 1), retest reliability and differences in scores before and after treatment.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 31 healthy volunteers and 87 patients were recruited (6 and 31 males, respectively). Phase 1—mean identification scores showed a small improvement after descriptor adaptations (13.77 and 14.57, <i>p</i> = 0.0029). Phase 2—41 untreated participants had a mean identification score of 7.31 at both intervals (95% CI: − 1.15 to 1.15, <i>p</i> &gt; 0.999). The mean change in treated participants was 1.88 (0.70 to 3.06, <i>p</i> = 0.0224). TDI score difference between treated and untreated groups was 6.63 (2.48 to 10.79, <i>p</i> = 0.0023). The intraclass correlation coefficient for untreated patients was high for both TDI score (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.93) and identification score (ICC = 0.80, 0.52 to 0.93); CIs suggest the reliability is moderate to excellent.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study confirms the validity of the descriptor adaptations of the identification component of the Sniffin’ Sticks test to distinguish between health and disease.</p><h3>Implications</h3><p>The Sniffin’ Sticks test can now reliably be used for clinical assessment of British patients, modifying only the descriptors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":516,"journal":{"name":"Chemosensory Perception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cultural Adaptation and Validity of the Sniffin’ Sticks Psychophysical Test for the UK Setting\",\"authors\":\"Lorna Langstaff,&nbsp;Allan Clark,&nbsp;Mahmoud Salam,&nbsp;Carl M. Philpott\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Olfactory testing must be culturally adapted to be relevant to the target population. This study aimed to validate the Sniffin’ Sticks test for the UK setting.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cohort study was conducted at a tertiary olfactory dysfunction clinic. Phase 1—healthy volunteers underwent the original German identification test followed by a UK adapted version. Phase 2—patients with olfactory dysfunction underwent the extended smell test (TDI) including the new descriptors. Outcome measures included differences in identification test (phase 1), retest reliability and differences in scores before and after treatment.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 31 healthy volunteers and 87 patients were recruited (6 and 31 males, respectively). Phase 1—mean identification scores showed a small improvement after descriptor adaptations (13.77 and 14.57, <i>p</i> = 0.0029). Phase 2—41 untreated participants had a mean identification score of 7.31 at both intervals (95% CI: − 1.15 to 1.15, <i>p</i> &gt; 0.999). The mean change in treated participants was 1.88 (0.70 to 3.06, <i>p</i> = 0.0224). TDI score difference between treated and untreated groups was 6.63 (2.48 to 10.79, <i>p</i> = 0.0023). The intraclass correlation coefficient for untreated patients was high for both TDI score (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.93) and identification score (ICC = 0.80, 0.52 to 0.93); CIs suggest the reliability is moderate to excellent.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study confirms the validity of the descriptor adaptations of the identification component of the Sniffin’ Sticks test to distinguish between health and disease.</p><h3>Implications</h3><p>The Sniffin’ Sticks test can now reliably be used for clinical assessment of British patients, modifying only the descriptors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chemosensory Perception\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chemosensory Perception\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Neuroscience\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemosensory Perception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12078-021-09287-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Neuroscience","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

嗅觉测试必须在文化上与目标人群相适应。这项研究旨在验证嗅探棒测试在英国的效果。方法在某三级嗅觉功能障碍门诊进行队列研究。第一阶段,健康的志愿者接受了最初的德国识别测试,然后是英国的改编版本。2期嗅觉功能障碍患者进行了包括新描述符的扩展嗅觉测试(TDI)。结果测量包括识别测试(第一阶段)的差异、重测信度和治疗前后得分的差异。结果共纳入健康志愿者31名,男性31名,患者87名。第一阶段平均识别分数在描述符适应后略有改善(13.77和14.57,p = 0.0029)。第2-41期未治疗的参与者在两个区间的平均识别评分为7.31 (95% CI: - 1.15至1.15,p > 0.999)。治疗参与者的平均变化为1.88(0.70至3.06,p = 0.0224)。治疗组与未治疗组TDI评分差异为6.63 (2.48 ~ 10.79,p = 0.0023)。未治疗患者的TDI评分(ICC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 ~ 0.93)和识别评分(ICC = 0.80, 0.52 ~ 0.93)的类内相关系数均较高;ci提示信度为中等至优秀。结论本研究证实了嗅探棒试验鉴别成分描述符适应性在区分健康和疾病方面的有效性。嗅探棒测试现在可以可靠地用于英国患者的临床评估,仅修改描述符。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cultural Adaptation and Validity of the Sniffin’ Sticks Psychophysical Test for the UK Setting

Introduction

Olfactory testing must be culturally adapted to be relevant to the target population. This study aimed to validate the Sniffin’ Sticks test for the UK setting.

Methods

A cohort study was conducted at a tertiary olfactory dysfunction clinic. Phase 1—healthy volunteers underwent the original German identification test followed by a UK adapted version. Phase 2—patients with olfactory dysfunction underwent the extended smell test (TDI) including the new descriptors. Outcome measures included differences in identification test (phase 1), retest reliability and differences in scores before and after treatment.

Results

A total of 31 healthy volunteers and 87 patients were recruited (6 and 31 males, respectively). Phase 1—mean identification scores showed a small improvement after descriptor adaptations (13.77 and 14.57, p = 0.0029). Phase 2—41 untreated participants had a mean identification score of 7.31 at both intervals (95% CI: − 1.15 to 1.15, p > 0.999). The mean change in treated participants was 1.88 (0.70 to 3.06, p = 0.0224). TDI score difference between treated and untreated groups was 6.63 (2.48 to 10.79, p = 0.0023). The intraclass correlation coefficient for untreated patients was high for both TDI score (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.93) and identification score (ICC = 0.80, 0.52 to 0.93); CIs suggest the reliability is moderate to excellent.

Conclusions

This study confirms the validity of the descriptor adaptations of the identification component of the Sniffin’ Sticks test to distinguish between health and disease.

Implications

The Sniffin’ Sticks test can now reliably be used for clinical assessment of British patients, modifying only the descriptors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Chemosensory Perception
Chemosensory Perception 农林科学-神经科学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Coverage in Chemosensory Perception includes animal work with implications for human phenomena and explores the following areas: Identification of chemicals producing sensory response; Identification of sensory response associated with chemicals; Human in vivo response to chemical stimuli; Human in vitro response to chemical stimuli; Neuroimaging of chemosensory function; Neurological processing of chemoreception; Chemoreception mechanisms; Psychophysics of chemoperception; Trigeminal function; Multisensory perception; Contextual effect on chemoperception; Behavioral response to chemical stimuli; Physiological factors affecting and contributing to chemoperception; Flavor and hedonics; Memory and chemoperception.
期刊最新文献
Odor identification testing is inferior compared to neurocognitive testing in predicting conversion to Alzheimer's Disease Children’s Personal Significance of Olfaction — the ChiPSO Questionnaire Subjective Mouthfeel and Temperature Alterations in COVID-19 Patients Six to Ten Months After Diagnosis A Pilot Study of Self-Rated and Psychophysical Olfactory Dysfunction in Men Living with HIV Effects of Gender and Age on Self-reported Odor Imagery Ability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1