An olfactory self-test effectively screens for COVID-19

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.

Transient loss and recovery of oral chemesthesis, taste and smell with COVID-19: A small case-control series

Transient loss of smell is a common symptom of influenza and other upper respiratory infections. Loss of taste is possible but rare with these illnesses, and patient reports of 'taste loss' typically arise from a taste / flavor confusion. Thus, initial reports from COVID-19 patients of loss of taste and chemesthesis (i.e., chemical somatosensation like warming or cooling) were met with skepticism until multiple studies confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections could disrupt these senses. Many studies have been based on self-report or on single time point assessments after acute illness was ended. Here, we describe intensive longitudinal data over 28 days from adults aged 18-45 years recruited in early 2021 (i.e., prior to the Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 waves). These individuals were either COVID-19 positive or close contacts (per U.S. CDC criteria at the time of the study) in the first half of 2021. Upon enrollment, all participants were given nose clips, blinded samples of commercial jellybeans (Sour Cherry and Cinnamon), and scratch-n-sniff odor identification test cards (ScentCheckPro), which they used for daily assessments. In COVID-19 cases who enrolled on or before Day 10 of infection, Gaussian Process Regression showed two distinct measures of function - odor identification and odor intensity - declined relative to controls (exposed individuals who never developed COVID-19). Because enrollment began upon exposure, some participants became ill only after enrollment, which allowed us to capture baseline ratings, onset of loss, and recovery. Data from these four cases and four age- and sex- matched controls were plotted over 28 days to create panel plots. Variables included mean orthonasal intensity of four odors (ScentCheckPro), perceived nasal blockage, oral burn (Cinnamon jellybeans), and sourness and sweetness (Sour Cherry jellybeans). Controls exhibited stable ratings over time. By contrast, COVID-19 cases showed sharp deviations over time. Changes in odor intensity or odor identification were not explained by nasal blockage. No single pattern of taste loss or recovery was apparent, implying different taste qualities might recover at different rates. Oral burn was transiently reduced for some before recovering quickly, suggesting acute loss may be missed in datasets collected only after illness ends. Collectively, intensive daily testing shows orthonasal smell, oral chemesthesis and taste were each altered by acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. This disruption was dyssynchronous for different modalities, with variable loss and recovery rates across both modalities and individuals.

Self-assessment of olfactory function using the "Sniffin' Sticks"

BACKGROUND

A precise and reliable test of the olfactory function is indispensable for the diagnosis of the olfactory disorder (OD). Despite of this, in a clinical context, often there is no place in daily routine for time-consuming procedures. This study aimed to examine if the assessment of olfactory function using the "Sniffin' Sticks" is suitable for self-assessment.

METHODS

Participants comprised 84 healthy control subjects (HC) and 37 OD patients. The "Sniffin' Sticks" test battery consisting of odor threshold (T), discrimination (D) and identification (I) tests was used for self- and assisted assessments. To save time, we applied the 8-item wide step version of the T test and the 8-item D test, whereas the I task remained the same as the original version. The whole test included two sessions, with each session comprising a self-assessment part performed by the participants themselves, and an assisted-assessment part performed by the examiner.

RESULTS

Sniffin' Sticks self-assessment was efficient in distinguishing between self-reported HC subjects and OD patients (p's < 0.01), and the scores did not differ significantly from the assisted-assessment (p's > 0.05). In the self-administered I and TDI tests, there was a moderate to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.51-0.93, p's < 0.01), and a strong to excellent correlation with the assisted assessment (r = 0.71-0.92, p's < 0.01). However, the self-administered T and D tests only exhibited low to moderate test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.30-0.72, p's < 0.05) and correlations with the assisted test (r = 0.31-0.62, p's < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The Identification self-test is appropriate to be solely applied, and is therefore an easy-to-use alternative for olfactory screening in a larger segment of patients. The whole "Sniffin' Sticks" self-test also shows good measurement properties and is therefore a suitable backup in clinical practice, but improvement is needed due to the simplified D and T self-test.

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.

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.

An olfactory perceptual fingerprint in people with olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19

The sense of smell is based on sensory detection of the molecule(s), which is then further perceptually interpreted. A possible measure of olfactory perception is an odor-independent olfactory perceptual fingerprint (OPF) defined by Snitz et al. We aimed to investigate whether OPF can distinguish patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) from controls and which perceptual descriptors are important for that separation. Our study included 99 healthy controls and 41 patients. They rated 10 odors using 8 descriptors such as "pleasant," "intense," "familiar," "warm," "cold," "irritating," "edible," and "disgusting." An unsupervised machine learning method, hierarchical cluster analysis, showed that OPF can distinguish patients from controls with an accuracy of 83%, a sensitivity of 51%, and a specificity of 96%. Furthermore, a supervised machine learning method, random forest classifier, showed that OPF can distinguish patients and controls in the testing dataset with an accuracy of 86%, a sensitivity of 64%, and a specificity of 96%. Principal component analysis and random forest classifier showed that familiarity and intensity were the key qualities to explain the variance of the data. In conclusion, people with COVID-19-related OD have a fundamentally different olfactory perception.

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.

Loss of olfactory sensitivity is an early and reliable marker for COVID-19

Detection of early and reliable symptoms is important in relation to limiting the spread of an infectious disease. For COVID-19, the most specific symptom is either losing or experiencing reduced olfactory functions. Anecdotal evidence suggests that olfactory dysfunction is also one of the earlier symptoms of COVID-19, but objective measures supporting this notion are currently missing. To determine whether olfactory loss is an early sign of COVID-19, we assessed available longitudinal data from a web-based interface enabling individuals to test their sense of smell by rating the intensity of selected household odors. Individuals continuously used the interface to assess their olfactory functions and at each login, in addition to odor ratings, recorded their symptoms and results from potential COVID-19 test. A total of 205 COVID-19-positive individuals and 156 pseudo-randomly matched control individuals lacking positive test provided longitudinal data which enabled us to assess olfactory functions in relation to their test result date. We found that odor intensity ratings started to decline in the COVID-19 group as early as 6 days prior to the test result date (±1.4 days). Symptoms, such as sore throat, aches, and runny nose appear around the same point in time; however, with a lower predictability of a COVID-19 diagnosis. Our results suggest that olfactory sensitivity loss is an early symptom but does not appear before other related COVID-19 symptoms. Olfactory loss is, however, more predictive of a COVID-19 diagnosis than other early symptoms.