Dataset Information

Equating scores of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test and Sniffin' Sticks test in patients with Parkinson's disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Impaired olfaction is an important feature in Parkinson's disease (PD) and other neurological diseases. A variety of smell identification tests exist such as "Sniffin' Sticks" and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). An important part of research is being able to replicate findings or combining studies in a meta-analysis. This is difficult if olfaction has been measured using different metrics. We present conversion methods between the: UPSIT, Sniffin' 16, and Brief-SIT (B-SIT); and Sniffin' 12 and Sniffin' 16 odour identification tests.

Methods

We used two incident cohorts of patients with PD who were tested with either the Sniffin' 16 (n = 1131) or UPSIT (n = 980) and a validation dataset of 128 individuals who took both tests. We used the equipercentile and Item Response Theory (IRT) methods to equate the olfaction scales.

Results

The equipercentile conversion suggested some bias between UPSIT and Sniffin' 16 tests across the two groups. The IRT method shows very good characteristics between the true and converted Sniffin' 16 (delta mean = 0.14, median = 0) based on UPSIT. The equipercentile conversion between the Sniffin' 12 and 16 item worked well (delta mean = 0.01, median = 0). The UPSIT to B-SIT conversion showed evidence of bias but amongst PD cases worked well (mean delta = -0.08, median = 0).

Conclusion

We have demonstrated that one can convert UPSIT to B-SIT or Sniffin' 16, and Sniffin' 12 to 16 scores in a valid way. This can facilitate direct comparison between tests aiding future collaborative analyses and evidence synthesis.

SUBMITTER: Lawton M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5159993 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection represents a worldwide critical health burden from the sanitary perspective. This disease's symptoms range from a mild flu-like form to a severe life-threatening respiratory disease and respiratory failure. Several patients, however, remain paucisymptomatic. Among the symptoms that seem relevant are the changes in taste and smell, regardless of the disease's severity.MethodsData from patients affected by COVID-19 infection, hospitalized from 15 to 29 April, 2020, were analyzed. Questionnaires about smell, taste, and nasal function were administered to all, and a proportion also received the Quick olfactory Sniffin' Sticks Test (q-Sticks) to objectivate the presence of anosmia or hyposmia. The results of instruments and Q-Sticks were then compared.ResultsThirty-seven patients (20 males, 54.1%), with a mean age 0f 69.19 years (SD = 17.96; median 76, IQR: 63-82) were evaluated. Among the patients, 8 (22%) were asymptomatic. Out of the remaining 29 patients, 28 (97%) had fever, 19 (66%) asthenia, 11 (38%) dry cough, 10 (34%) dyspnea, and 6 (21%) gastroenteric symptoms. The q-Sticks test was performed on 27 patients and showed that 6 with anosmia, and 16 patients had hyposmia, where only 5 (14%) patients complained of loss of smell by conducting the questionnaires.ConclusionAlthough olfactory disturbances may be secondary to other factors, a sudden onset of anosmia or hyposmia should be assessed as a possible symptom of COVID-19 infection. The use of questionnaires or anamnestic collection is sometimes not enough, while adding to them a simple test such as the q-Sticks test can provide more accurate and reliable data. A simple, easy-to-perform, and reliable tool (q-Sticks) for olfactory disorders assessment can be administered to identify the real size of anosmia in patients with COVID-19 infection and detect the early stage of infection or paucisymptomatic patients, therefore becoming important to reduce the spreading of the pandemic.

Project description:Background and objectivesThe University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) is commonly used to assess olfaction and screen for early detection of disorders including Parkinson (PD) and Alzheimer disease. Our objective was to develop updated percentiles, based on substantially larger samples than previous norms, to more finely discriminate age- and sex-specific UPSIT performance among ≥50-year-old adults who may be candidates for studies of prodromal neurodegenerative diseases.MethodsThe UPSIT was administered cross-sectionally to participants recruited between 2007-2010 and 2013-2015 for the Parkinson Associated Risk Syndrome (PARS) and Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) cohort studies, respectively. Exclusion criteria included age <50 years and a confirmed or suspected PD diagnosis. Demographics, family history, and prodromal features of PD including self-reported hyposmia were collected. Normative data including mean, SDs, and percentiles were derived by age and sex.ResultsThe analytic sample included 9,396 individuals (5,336 female and 4,060 male), aged 50-95 years, who were predominantly White, non-Hispanic US residents. UPSIT percentiles were derived and are provided across 7 age categories (50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, and ≥80 years) for female and male participants separately; relative to existing norms, subgroups included between 2.4 and 20 times as many participants. Olfactory function declined with age and was better among women than men; accordingly, the percentile corresponding to a given raw score varied markedly by age and sex. UPSIT performance was comparable among individuals with vs without first-degree family history of PD. Comparisons of self-reported hyposmia vs UPSIT percentiles indicated a strong association (χ2 p < 0.0001) but minimal agreement (Cohen simple kappa [95% CI]: = 0.32 [0.28-0.36] for female participants; 0.34 [0.30-0.38] for male participants).DiscussionUpdated age/sex-specific UPSIT percentiles are provided for ≥50-year-old adults who reflect a population likely to be recruited into studies of prodromal neurodegenerative diseases. Our findings highlight the potential advantages of evaluating olfaction relative to age and sex instead of in absolute terms (i.e., based on raw UPSIT scores) or based on subjective (i.e., self-reported) measures. This information addresses the need to support studies of disorders including PD and Alzheimer disease by providing updated normative data from a larger sample of older adults.Trial registration informationNCT00387075 and NCT01141023.