Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS−CoV−2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID−19), has currently infected over 6.5 million people worldwide. In response to the pandemic, numerous studies have tried to identify the causes and symptoms of the disease. Emerging evidence supports recently acquired anosmia (complete loss of smell) and hyposmia (partial loss of smell) as symptoms of COVID−19, but studies of olfactory dysfunction show a wide range of prevalence, from 5% to 98%. We undertook a search of Pubmed/Medline and Google Scholar with the keywords 'COVID−19', 'smell', and/or 'olfaction'. We included any study that quantified olfactory loss as a symptom of COVID%[minus]19. Studies were grouped and compared based on the type of method used to measure smell loss − subjective measures such as self−reported smell loss versus objective measures using rated stimuli − to determine if prevalence rate differed by method type. For each study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated from point estimates of olfactory disturbance rates. We identified 34 articles quantifying anosmia as a symptom of COVID−19, collected from cases identified from January 16 to April 30, 2020. The pooled prevalence estimate of smell loss was 77% when assessed through objective measurements (95% CI of 61.4-89.2%) and 45% with subjective measurements (95% CI of 31.1-58.5%). Objective measures are a more sensitive method to identify smell loss as a result of infection with SARS−CoV−2. The use of subjective measures, while expedient during the early stages of the pandemic, underestimates the true prevalence of smell loss.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Dr. Mackenzie Hannum is supported by NIH T32 funding (DC000014). Dr. Paule Joseph is supported by the National Institute of Nursing Research under award number 1ZIANR000035-01. PVJ is also supported by the Office of Workforce Diversity, National Institutes of Health and the Rockefeller University Heilbrunn Nurse Scholar Award.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This is a meta-analysis and systematic review and the IRBs approved the individual studies and no IRB approval is needed fo conduct this meta-analysis of published literature
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All code and data are available on Github
